On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> This patch just cleans up some remaining code for removed cris-aout
> subtarget by folding away code that was conditional on TARGET_ELF.
>
> Tested with a x86_64-linux X cris-elf cross-compiler. OK for trunk?
Woohoo, that's a lot of left-over cruft!
@@
Trying --enable-build-with-cxx revealed a build regression for
cris-elf from the recent atomic support bits. Tested the same,
no regressions.
Casting those INTVAL's would've been a tiny bit uglier than
using a temp, thus. Hey, those were stashed there as ints
so what's wrong with passing them as
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012, Oleg Endo wrote:
> I've tried some of the cases mentioned in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50749
> with Sandra's patch applied. Unfortunately it didn't help much.
But thanks for checking!
> There
> seem to be other things going wrong with auto-inc-dec.
Yeah
> From: Michael Hope
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:04:19 +0200
> On 8 June 2012 16:53, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> >> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 06:29:04 +0200
> >
> >> > From: Michael Hope
> >> > Date:
> From: Gerald Pfeifer
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:27:21 +0200
> This is only a review wearing my web hat; it is orthogonal to the
> discussion with the ARM guys. ;-)
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > +On ARM, when compiling for ARMv6 (b
> From: Richard Earnshaw
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:16:50 +0200
> The ARM ABI states that vectors larger than 64 bits in size still have
> 64-bit alignment; never-the-less, the HW supports alignment hints of up
> to 128-bits in some cases and will trap in a vector has an alignment
> that less th
On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Oleg Endo wrote:
> > Some of the tests pass, some of them don't because
> > of the auto-inc-dec issues mentioned in the PR.
>
> I thought that the tests which are known to fail are marked
> with XFAIL,
Yes, with a clear reference to the PR at the xfail.
T
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:59:57 +0200
> > From: Michael Hope
> > Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:04:19 +0200
>
> > On 8 June 2012 16:53, Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > wrote:
> > >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > >>
> From: Richard Henderson
> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 23:04:02 +0200
> On 2012-05-31 22:58, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > +(define_expand "atomic_compare_and_swap"
> > + [(match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand")
> > + (match_operand:BWD 1 &
> From: Michael Hope
> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:43:47 +0200
> On 13 June 2012 02:32, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> >> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:59:57 +0200
> >> > > user-space code". Maybe the kernel too, I can't
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 01:16:09 +0200
> +to be compiled with -mno-unaligned-accesses.
Better spelled as "-mno-unaligned-access". Bah.
brgds, H-P
96.62.19
> 76.96.62.24
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> MIME-Version: 1.0
>
> On Jun 12, 2012, at 4:47 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >> From: Richard Henderson
> >> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 23:04:02 +0200
> > Putting a lot of trust onto users and libr
On Thu, 14 Jun 2012, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> On 14/06/2012, at 6:33 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Maxim Kuvyrkov writes:
> >> +/* Subroutines of the mips_process_sync_loop.
> >> + Emit barriers as needed for the memory MODEL. */
> >> +
> >> +static bool
> >> +mips_emit_pre_atomic_barrier_p (
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> On 15/06/2012, at 8:51 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > While you're editing in these parts, how about making this
> > "bool emit_atomic_barrier_p (enum memmodel, bool pre)" and move it to
> > the middle-end, say
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 02:31:10 +0200
> > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 01:38:22 +0200
>
> > gcc:
> > Fix configure test for "stack protector support in target C library".
> > * configure
Y is 28 for introduction of the quoted code in
arch/arm/mm/alignment.c, AFAICT, so how about this one, ok now?
Index: changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.113
diff -p -u -r1.1
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> I've now committed this, see r188791.
Breaking cris-elf. Just try rebuilding cc1:
./gcc/gcc/../libdecnumber/dpd -I../libdecnumber\
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/config/cris/cris.c -o cris.o
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/config/cr
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> The attached patch removes NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C, and replaces its sole
> user with IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C to avoid the double negations (#ifndef
> NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C, etc.).
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk?
I saw it w
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, rbmj wrote:
> There is an alternate solution- I could use fixincludes to add a macro to wrap
> over mkdir on VxWorks. A couple of possible ways to do this:
>
> 1. Define a normal macro to posix-ify it, i.e. #define mkdir(a, b)
> ((mkdir)(a)). Since this would hide single-arg
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200
A ping.
> Y is 28 for introduction of the quoted code in
> arch/arm/mm/alignment.c, AFAICT, so how about this one, ok now?
>
> Index: changes.html
> =
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:48:35 +0200
> > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 02:31:10 +0200
> > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > > Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 01:38:22 +0200
> >
> > > gcc:
> > >
On Sun, 24 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> * doc/tm.texi.in: Remove UNALIGNED_INT_ASM_OP reference from the
> documentation.
> * doc/tm.texi: Regenerate.
> * doc/cpp.texi: Make example for #error generic.
> * config/frv/frv.h: Fix example text to match tm.texi.
FWI
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:24:01 +0200
> > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200
>
> A ping.
And another ping, now CCing ARM maintainers,
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg00983.html>.
>
> From: "Joseph S. Myers"
> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:09:42 +0200
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > > > > Fix configure test for "stack protector support in target C
> > > > > library".
> > >
> From: Richard Sandiford
> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 11:14:49 +0200
> Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
> >> From: Richard Sandiford
> >> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 16:46:38 +0200
> >
> >> To repeat: as things stand, very few targets define proper rtx costs
>
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:06:44 +0200
> > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:24:01 +0200
>
> > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200
> >
> > A ping.
>
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> Since output_addr_const() shows pretty hot in the compiler, I reinstated the
> fprint_w() call in place of fprintf().
>
> This patch relies on two things: 2's complement representation for negative
> int and that HOST_WIDE_INT is at least as large ty
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Jia Liu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> When I build lm32-elf-gcc, it failed at libgcc configure due to
> lm32-elf-cc1 segment fault when compile conftest.c:
>
> void bar ();
> void clean (int *);
> void foo ()
> {
> int i __attribute__ ((cleanup (clean)));
> bar();
> }
>
> Then I fin
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Jia Liu wrote:
> May you
> give me more comment? I wanna fix it.
Sorry, I'll leave that to the lm32 maintainer, I just wasnted to
clear a misunderstanding regarding TARGET_LEGITIMATE_CONSTANT_P.
brgds, H-P
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 01:02:34 +0200
PR rtl-optimization/53176
> * rtlanal.c (rtx_cost): Adjust default cost for X with a
> UNITS_PER_WORD factor for all X according to the size of
> its mode, not just for SUBREGs with
> From: Richard Sandiford
> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:18:54 +0200
> if (CALL_P (insn))
> {
> if (RTL_CONST_OR_PURE_CALL_P (insn))
> /* Pure functions can read from memory. Const functions can
> read from arguments that the ABI has forced onto the stack.
> From: Richard Guenther
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:37:13 +0200
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > wrote:
> >>> From: Richard Sandiford
> >>> Date: Thu, 12 J
> From: Richard Guenther
> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 10:08:05 +0200
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
> wrote:
> > Ok for 4.7 too?
>
> Of course.
Committed to trunk as follows, including the test-case which
doesn't fail on trunk but does on 4.6
These were spotted while debugging usage of atomics within
glibc. The kind of changes are microoptimizations,
nanooptimizations, a buglet and a major issue. Micro: the
load-store-conditional sequence for compare-and-swap I
originally committed was an earlier version improved later.
Nanooptimizati
Use the new need_atomic_barrier_p.
gcc:
* config/cris/sync.md ("atomic_fetch_")
("atomic_compare_and_swap"): Gate expand_mem_thread_fence
calls on result of call to need_atomic_barrier_p.
Index: config/cris/sync.md
==
Buglet in "atomic_compare_and_swap", allowing (in theory)
a volatile or post-increment memory operand. Simplest and
safest fixed by excluding all memory operands.
gcc:
* config/cris/sync.md ("atomic_compare_and_swap"): Change
predicate to nonmemory_operand for operand 3. Add FIXM
Microoptimizations for the atomic patterns themselves. Constant
operands are so common that it seems wasteful not to handle the
most common cases and avoid wasting a register.
gcc/testsuite:
* gcc.target/cris/20011127-1.c: Adjust to %P being a
valid register operand output modifie
Well, give up by default that is, and fix it up in a helper
function in glibc to hold a global byte-sized atomic lock for
the duration. (Sorry!) Yes, this means that
fold_builtin_atomic_always_lock_free is wrong. It knows about
alignment in general but doesn't handle the case where the
default a
Buglet in cris_preferred_reload_class, incidental, apparently
without effect at least regarding failing test-cases. A class
disjunct from the input was returned as "preferred". It could
arguably be gcc_asserted as a sanity-check by the caller that
the returned class is a subset of the original cl
I think CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P can and should be eliminated,
replaced by something like
CONSTANT_P (x) && targetm.legitimate_address_p (QImode, x, false)
(or QImode replaced by the known used mode) in the code
currently calling it.
It should, because the default definition is redundant and evil;
easy
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 05:49:00 +0200
> gcc:
> * config/cris/sync.md ("atomic_fetch_")
> ("cris_atomic_fetch__1")
> ("atomic_compare_and_swap")
> ("cris_atomic_compare_and_swap_1"):
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:24:48 +0200
> On 07/15/2012 11:49 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > Well, give up by default that is, and fix it up in a helper
> > function in glibc to hold a global byte-sized atomic lock for
> > the duration. (So
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:24:48 +0200
> Any PR's you open related this this, copy me on them and I'll try to get
> them addressed.
I could separate the issues I saw into PRs 54003-6. That's all,
hopefully ...at least for now. :)
BTW, your @gcc.gnu.org account doesn't
> From: Nick Clifton
> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:51:16 +0200
> 2012-07-18 Nick Clifton
>
> * doc/invoke.texi (ARM Options): Document -munaligned-access.
>
> Index: gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> ===
> --- gcc/doc/invoke.texi
> From: nick clifton
> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:18:52 +0200
> "approved - please apply".
Thanks! I see the last sentence could do with better
punctuation, so I added the obvious comma. Installed as
follows.
Index: changes.html
=
Looks like these were left from Steven's ident-cleanup.
Steven, for future reference, you might want to use
contrib/warn_summary on the build-logs. ;)
Incidentally, the magic option to increase diff context for svn
is -x -U as in "-x -U5" below, just to show there's not much
else in that function.
The #elif defined ... #define DO_TEST 0 exceptions are accumulating.
Maybe the DO_TEST = 1 case should be the exception...
Committed.
gcc/testsuite:
* gcc.c-torture/execute/20101011-1.c (DO_TEST): Define as 0 for CRIS.
Index: gcc.c-torture/execute/20101011-1.c
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Resending. I did not get any responses the last two times and I too
> forgot about it. Can someone please review this?
This is *not* an approver-review.
> An assembler directive with an operand is filtered through
> output_asm_insn (or asm
Tested crisv32-linux (much as you can do without actually
installing a new /lib/ld.so.1 with the changed defaults).
Yep, this is actually a change of the default in glibc (port to
be submitted), but changing it this way is safe: with old
libraries lacking a note, they default to not having an
execu
I changed the defaults for cris*-linux*, but didn't fix the
test-suite to go with that, so with unaligned accesses working,
the test-suite still checked that they trapped, doh. Here's the
update, checked trunk cris-elf and crisv32-elf (because of
difference in atomics) and crisv32-linux* on the lo
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012, Ryan Mansfield wrote:
> On 12-07-19 05:33 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > > > Index: changes.html
> > > > +some source codes generates code that accesses memory on unaligned
> > > > +adresses. This will require the kernel
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 07/21/2012 06:10 AM, Oleg Endo wrote:
> > I think on SH the cost test in lshift_cheap_p with
> > gen_rtx_ASHIFT (word_mode, const1_rtx, reg), speed_p);
> >
> > will always 'fail', because of sh.c (shiftcosts):
> > /* There is no pattern for co
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 19:38:15 +0200
> > > I've implemented this as a separate hook, rather than using the existing
> > > hooks because there's a strong likelihood of breaking some existing ABIs
> > > if I did it another way.
> > >
> > > There are a couple of tests that
On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Hi,
> The Linux kernel already supports non-executable stack since around
> February 2010. This patch has GCC emit the notes that are associated
> with non-executable stack.
What does the kernel do when the note isn't present?
> OK? Bootstrapped and
> From: Ulrich Weigand
> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:24:08 +0200
> Richard (Earnshaw) has asked me to take over working on this patch now.
>
> I've now made the change requested above and removed the size argument.
> The target is now simply asked to return the required alignment for the
> given v
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> As $SUBJECT says. There's not too much interesting here. I did a
> fairly literal-minded conversion, so it's possible there's smarter ways
> to do some things.
Doesn't look too bad though, but ...
> Compiled with cross to mmix-knuth-mmixware and spot-ch
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> Thanks Andreas, hp, Mike, for your comments. Mike I'd appreciate if you
> elaborated on how to speed-up sprint_uw_rev(), I don't think I understood what
> you have in mind.
I just commented on comments and just above the nit-level;
formatting and co
On Mon, 6 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote:
> >
> > What else is missing to make this patch appropriate for libiberty? Should I
> > change the prolog in strnlen.c, since I only copied it intact from gnulib?
>
> We generally try to avoid
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> New patch below. Retested on i686 and bfin.
Yay, bikeshedding opportunity! :P
Can we call them "leading *repeated* sign bits"? (in docs and
comments) Calling them "redundant" makes you think the
representation is not two's complement but new and improv
On Sun, 3 Jul 2011, Thomas Klein wrote:
> Ye Joey wrote:
> > Thomas,
> >
> > I think your are working on a very useful feature. I have ARM MCU
> > applications running of out stack space and resulting strange
> > behaviors silently. I'd like to try your patch and probably give
> > further comm
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 06/15/11 21:46, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > > PR rtl-optimization/48542
> > > * reload.c (find_equiv_reg): Stop looking when finding a
> > > setjmp-type call.
> > > * reload
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, Anatoly Sokolov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This patch removes obsolete PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and
> PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P macros from MMIX back end in the GCC and
> introduces equivalent TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND, TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and
> TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_P
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> (In checking for such files -
> there aren't that many - I also noticed that the target macro
> DELAY_SLOTS_FOR_EPILOGUE is used and documented but not defined by any
> target, so the code relating to that macro is ripe for removal and
> poisoning of th
On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Richard Henderson wrote:
> This seems to do the trick for sim testing of sh-elf and cris-elf.
>
> I'm interested in advice re debugging experiences with delay slots.
> It seems like for calls there's no alternative but to have the unwind
> info be incorrect when stopped at the c
On Sun, 7 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> opth-gen.awk has
>
> print "#define " mask name " (1 << " masknum[vname]++ ")"
>
> and int has 32bits. We should check
>
> if (masknum[var] > 32)
>
> instead of
>
> if (masknum[var] > 31)
IIUC the (int32_t) sign-bit is supposed to be reserved and this
i
On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, Anatoly Sokolov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This patch removes obsolete REGISTER_MOVE_COST macro from MMIX back end in
> the GCC and introduces equivalent TARGET_REGISTER_MOVE_COST target hook.
...and removed a comment about a moot issue (perfectly ok).
>
> Regression tested on mmix-
On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, Anatoly Sokolov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> This patch remove unused REG_OK_FOR_BASE_P and REG_OK_FOR_INDEX_P macros
> from the MMIX back end.
>
> Regression tested on mmix-knuth-mmixware.
>
> OK to install?
>
> * config/mmix/mmix.h (REG_OK_FOR_BASE_P, REG_OK_FOR_INDEX_P):
On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
> * SUPPORTS_WEAK is probably best detected with autoconf. We have
> libgfortran/acinclude.m4 (LIBGFOR_GTHREAD_WEAK), but should probably
> go for m4/ax_sys_weak_alias.m4 from the autoconf-archive instead. If
> we're lucky, that macro can detect suppor
On Tue, 9 Aug 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> This fixes PR49937 - callers of get_{pointer,object}_alignment
> probably should not use BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT to limit what these
> functions return (why do they do that? Maybe because formerly
> the routines returned TYPE_ALIGN? But why wasn't that bo
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> This is an optimization in machine dependent reorg to
> remove redundant comparisons like in
>
>cc0 = compare (Reg, Num)
>if (cc0 == 0)
> goto L1
>
>cc0 = compare (Reg, Num)
>if (cc0 > 0)
> goto L2
>
> The second comparison
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Hans-Peter Nilsson schrieb:
> > A glance at AVR makes me think this should already be handled by
> > the NOTICE_UPDATE_CC machinery. Any analysis why this doesn't
> > happen? With the same test-case (at -Os) I don't
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> If the patch is OK, I'd like to make corresponding changes to each port's
> .md files. Are they simple enough to count as obvious, or should I get
> persmission for each one?
Preapproved for CRIS and MMIX.
brgds, H-P
This patch:
> 2011-08-11 Uros Bizjak
>
> * builtins.def (BUILT_IN_ICEIL{,F,L}, BUILT_IN_IFLOOR{,F,L},
> BUILT_IN_IRINT{,F,L}, BUILT_IN_IROUND{,F,L}: New builtin definitions.
> * convert.c (convert_to_integer): Convert to BUILT_IN_ICEIL,
> BUILT_IN_IFLOOR, BUILT_IN_IRINT
> Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 10:43:35 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Richard Guenther
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > So, ok as is?
> > If not, would you preapprove tree-dumping decl_uids only at a
> > higher dump verbosity level?
>
> Ok. Yes, definitely
Committed after testing cross to cris-elf and crisv32-elf; for
the former back to the two regressions before the recent libgcc
move.
Ironically, the *reference* in the quoted failure:
> complex-1.c:(.text+0x9e): undefined reference to `__nesf2'
should not have been there in the first place, as the
Ping again, CC:ing testsuite maintainers.
Honza thought this was a good idea, if that helps.
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:34:07 +0200
> Subject changed from '[RFA:] fix breakage with "Update testsuite
> to run with slim LTO"' exce
> From: Mike Stump
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:53:05 +0100
> On Nov 4, 2011, at 6:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
> wrote:
> > Ping again, CC:ing testsuite maintainers.
>
> With the number of qualified individuals commenting in the
> thread, I was going to stay out of it.
> From: Mike Stump
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 18:54:22 +0100
> On Nov 4, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > I'll wait a few days.
>
> No need to wait. :-) If someone finds a way and is
> motivated, they will fix this and the other instances. :-
> From: Anatoly Sokolov
> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:37:12 +0100
> Comments? OK to install?
>
> * config/cris/constraints.md: New file.
Whee!
> * config/cris/cris.h (REG_CLASS_FROM_LETTER, CONSTRAINT_LEN,
> CRIS_CONST_OK_FOR_LETTER_P, CONST_OK_FOR_CONSTRAINT_P,
>
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 00:50:47 +0100
> These are the changes to libstdc++ to make use of the new atomics. I
> changed the files to use the new atomics, and bkoz did a shuffling of
> the include file layout to better suit the new c++ approach.
>
> previously, libstdc++ p
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 05:25:15 +0100
> On 11/06/2011 07:38 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >
> > This (formally a change in the range 181027:181034) got me three
> > libstdc++ regressions for cris-elf, which has no "atomic"
> >
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:44:47 +0100
> Actually, this target has no lock free support whatsoever? ie, no
> compare_and_swap instruction, nor an implementation of
> sync_lock_test_and_set and sync_lock_release?
In CRIS versions where such support would make sense: of c
> From: "Joseph S. Myers"
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 17:24:04 +0100
> On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
> > Actually, this target has no lock free support whatsoever? ie, no
> > compare_and_swap instruction, nor an implementation of
> > sync_lock_test_and_set
> > and sync_lock_release?
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 19:08:26 +0100
> So, what DO we do if there is no basic level of atomic
> support...
I just realized I may be feeding you an inconsistent
configuration, see the atomicity stuff in
libstdc++-v3/config/cpu/cris. Is that just obsolete and unused
now o
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:44:47 +0100
> >> On 11/06/2011 07:38 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> >>> This (formally a change in the range 181027:181034) got me three
> >>> libstdc++ regressions for cris-elf,
> >> yes, I ha
> From: Alan Modra
> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> * function.c (bb_active_p): Delete.
> (dup_block_and_redirect, active_insn_between): New functions.
> (convert_jumps_to_returns, emit_return_for_exit)
> From: Anatoly Sokolov
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 22:42:53 +0100
> This patch removes obsolete FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P macro from CRIS back end
> in the GCC and introduces equivalent TARGET_FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P target
> hook.
>
> Regression tested on cris-axis-elf.
>
> OK to install?
Pl
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
> > From: Alan Modra
> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100
>
> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
>
> > * function.c (bb_active_p): Delete.
> From: Richard Guenther
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:22:56 +0100
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
> wrote:
> >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> >> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
> >
> >> > From: Alan Modra
> >>
> From: Bernd Schmidt
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100
> HP, can you run full tests?
Cross-test to cris-elf in progress.
Thanks!
brgds, H-P
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:12:54 +0100
> > From: Bernd Schmidt
> > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100
>
> > HP, can you run full tests?
>
> Cross-test to cris-elf in progress.
> Thanks!
Works, no regressions compared to b
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:52:44 +0100
> On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> > Justa minute
> >
> > Andrew
> doh. sorry about that
Test cross to cris-elf in progress for your second take (at
r181254 + Bernd's patch to unbreak the tree for
arm-linux-gnueabi an
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:06:26 +0100
> > From: Andrew MacLeod
> > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:52:44 +0100
> > On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> > > Justa minute
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > doh. sor
> From: Benjamin Kosnik
> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 06:43:29 +0100
> So, all:
>
> config/cpu/*/atomicity.h
And config/cpu/*/atomic_word.h presumably?
> Should go. I'll look in to peeling off this cruft sharpish.
brgds, H-P
> From: Andrew MacLeod
> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:45:11 +0100
> On 11/11/2011 12:43 AM, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> I think there is also an argument for single threaded-ness vs multi
> threaded. If there is no atomic support and its single threaded, we
> don't really need the lock... and I'm no
> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:52:39 +0100
> > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
> > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:12:54 +0100
>
> > > From: Bernd Schmidt
> > > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100
> >
> > > HP, can you run f
> From: Bernd Schmidt
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:51:56 +0100
> On 11/11/11 20:13, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > AFAICT, your patch has got sufficiently testing now (on three
> > targets to boot) to be considered safe to check in. Or is
> > something amiss?
> >
> From: Richard Henderson
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:48:03 +0100
> On 11/14/2011 04:10 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > Looks like all we need is a positive review of
> > <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01409.html> and a
> > ChangeLog entry
> From: Alan Modra
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:56:48 +0100
> I haven't really looked into what Bernd's fix does. I know this one
> fixes what I broke..
Hm... Oh well, I'm trusting RTH and Bernd that it fixed a real issue.
Thanks for looking (and a belated thanks to RTH for the review).
brgds,
> From: Anatoly Sokolov
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 22:42:53 +0100
> Regression tested on cris-axis-elf.
>
> OK to install?
>
> * config/cris/cris.c (cris_function_value_regno_p): Make static.
> (TARGET_FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P): Define.
> * config/cris/cris.h (FUNCTION_VA
301 - 400 of 1105 matches
Mail list logo
