> -Original Message-
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 9:29 PM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: l...@redhat.com; GCC Patches; Richard Sandiford; 'Terry Guo'
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] Backport to GCC
> -Original Message-
> From: Terry Guo [mailto:flame...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 3:24 PM
> To: Segher Boessenkool
> Cc: l...@redhat.com; Hale Wang; GCC Patches; Richard Sandiford
> Subject: Re: Ping^3 : [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't c
> -Original Message-
> From: Hale Wang [mailto:hale.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 9:54 AM
> To: Richard Earnshaw
> Cc: Hale Wang; gcc-patches; Matthew Gretton-Dann
> Subject: RE: [Ping^2] [PATCH, ARM, libgcc] New aeabi_idiv function for
> ar
> -Original Message-
> From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 5:00 PM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan; Joseph Myers; GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2] [ARM] [libgcc] Support RTABI half-prec
> -Original Message-
> From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 3:50 PM
> To: Joseph Myers
> Cc: Hale Wang; GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2] [ARM] [libgcc] Support RTABI half-precision
> conversion functi
Ping for trunk?
Hale
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Sandiford [mailto:rdsandif...@googlemail.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 4:04 AM
> To: Terry Guo
> Cc: Segher Boessenkool; Richard Sandiford; GCC Patches; Hale Wang
> Subject: Re: Ping : [PATCH] [gcc
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Myers
> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 4:30 AM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: 'GCC Patches'
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2] [ARM] [libgcc] Support RT
> -Original Message-
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 6:16 AM
> To: Hale Wang; 'GCC Patches'; Richard Sandiford
> Subject: Re: Ping : [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the
ins
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg01059.html.
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Hale Wang
> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2014 9:36 AM
> To: gcc-patches
> Subject: RE: [Ping] [
Ping?
> -Original Message-
> From: Hale Wang [mailto:hale.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 9:58 AM
> To: Hale Wang; 'Segher Boessenkool'
> Cc: GCC Patches
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the insns if a
> vol
just used to fix this bug. Is it OK for you?
Thanks,
Hale
gcc/ChangeLog:
2015-01-27 Segher Boessenkool
Hale Wang
PR rtl-optimization/64818
* combine.c (can_combine_p): Don't combine the insn if
the dest of insn is a user specified register.
gcc/tes
> -Original Message-
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 12:52 PM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the insns if a
> volatile register is c
> -Original Message-
> From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:seg...@kernel.crashing.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 3:07 AM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the insns if a
> volatile register is cont
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Pinski [mailto:pins...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 6:03 PM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [gcc, combine] PR46164: Don't combine the insns if a
> volatile register is contained.
>
The volatile register "r1" is totally disappeared in the asm_operands, and
the generated asm code is unexpected.
This patch is used to disable the combine operation if the insns contain
volatile registers. A new test case is also added in this patch.
Is it OK for trun
Hi,
This patch is tuned particularly for benchmark performance on cortex-m7.
Tested with GCC regression test, no regressions. Is it ok for trunk?
BR,
Hale Wang
gcc/ChangeLog
2014-12-24 Hale Wang
* config/arm/arm.c: Tune the max_cond_insns/branch_cost for
Cortex-M7.
diff
This issue is already fixed by your commit r218760.
Thanks.
Hale.
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Hale Wang
> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 10:17 AM
> To: 'Vladimir Makarov';
Hi,
This commit will cause another GCC build fail for ARM targets. The details are
descripted in the following Bugzilla linker:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64323.
Could you help me to have a look?
Thanks,
Hale.
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org
Ping? Already applied to arm/embedded-4_9-branch, is it OK for trunk?
-Hale
> -Original Message-
> From: Joey Ye [mailto:joey.ye...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2014 10:01 AM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: gcc-patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, ARM, libgcc] New aeabi
passed for armv6-m.
OK for trunk?
Thanks,
Hale Wang
libgcc/ChangeLog:
2014-11-26 Hale Wang
* config/arm/lib1funcs.S: Add new wrapper.
===
diff --git a/libgcc/config/arm/lib1funcs.S b/libgcc/config/arm/lib1funcs.S
index b617137..de66c81
s patch is used to fix this issue.
These cases will be skipped if we don't define
"-mcpu=cortex-m0/m1/m0plus.small-multiply". So no influence to other
targets.
Build gcc passed. Is it OK for trunk?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Hale Wang
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2014-11-13 Hale Wan
> -Original Message-
> From: Hale Wang [mailto:hale.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 2:16 PM
> To: 'Christophe Lyon'
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: Small multiplier support in Cortex-M0/1/+
>
> > -Original M
> -Original Message-
> From: Christophe Lyon [mailto:christophe.l...@linaro.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 9:49 PM
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Small multiplier support in Cortex-M0/1/+
>
> On 21 October 2014 12:01,
Ping?
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg02027.html
Thanks,
Hale Wang
> -Original Message-
> From: Hale Wang [mailto:hale.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 6:02 PM
> To: 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: Small multiplier support
Ping?
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg02025.html
Thanks
Hale Wang
> -Original Message-
> From: Hale Wang [mailto:hale.w...@arm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:57 PM
> To: Hale Wang; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Add arm_cortex_m7_tu
. As for non-OS,
there will be no such a limit.
Some test cases are also added in the testsuite to verify this function.
Is it ok for trunk?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Hale Wang
gcc/ChangeLog:
2014-08-29 Hale Wang
* config/arm/arm-cores.def: Add support for
-mcpu=cortex-m0.small
Attach the patch.
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Hale Wang
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:49 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: [PATCH] Add arm_cortex_m7_tune.
>
> Hi,
Hi,
This patch is used to tune the gcc for Cortex-M7.
The performance of Dhrystone can be improved by 1%.
The performance of Coremark can be improved by 2.3%.
Patch also attached for convenience.
Is it ok for trunk?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Hale Wang
gcc/ChangeLog
2014-10-11 Hale Wang
Refer to: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg01429.html.
Sorry for an extra whitespace.
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Hale Wang
> Sent: 2014年8月6日 13:50
> To: GCC Patches
&
upstream gcc 4.9 branch?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Hale Wang
> -Original Message-
> From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
> Sent: 2014年6月21日 5:24
> To: Hale Wang
> Cc: 'Mike Stump'; Richard Biener; Mike Stump; GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [Committed] [PATCH] PR61123 : Fix the ABI mis-matching error
> caused b
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Stump [mailto:mikest...@comcast.net]
> Sent: 2014年6月19日 1:42
> To: Richard Biener
> Cc: Hale Wang; Mike Stump; GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR61123 : Fix the ABI mis-matching error caused by
LTO
>
> On Jun 18, 2014, at
and new lto tests are added in gcc.target/arm/lto.
Bootstrap and no make check regression on X86-64.
Patch also attached for convenience. Is It ok for trunk?
Thanks and Best Regards,
Hale Wang
c-family/ChangeLog
2014-06-18 Hale Wang
PR lto/61123
*c.opt
33 matches
Mail list logo
