Ok.
David
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Sharad Singhai sing...@google.com wrote:
I reverted the earlier broken patch. I am including an updated patch
which warns only for real conversion, not for integral conversions. I
also updated the test case to include an integral conversion (int to
To avoid printing twice, can you just do
opt_type = (warn_conversion ? OPT_Wconversion : OPT_Wreal_conversion);
warning_at (loc, opt_type, ...);
David
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Sharad Singhai sing...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch forward ports the -Wreal-conversion warning to
Perhaps provide a tiny example showing the change (user level) before and after?
David
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Gerald Pfeifer ger...@pfeifer.com wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
h3 id=rxIA-32/x86-64/h3
^
Ahem, no. :-) Please use id=x86 instead.
ul
ok.
David
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Sharad Singhai sing...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
To avoid printing twice, can you just do
opt_type = (warn_conversion ? OPT_Wconversion : OPT_Wreal_conversion);
warning_at (loc
Looks good.
thanks,
David
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
In lipo mode, this patch updates the overall unit size only when the
eventual function to which the callee is inlined is in primary module.
This is to avoid the situation where the module
Should the patch be ported to in 48 branch?
thanks,
David
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Vladimir Makarov vmaka...@redhat.com wrote:
On 13-06-19 1:23 AM, Wei Mi wrote:
Ping.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Wei Mi w...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
+jakub who manages GCC 4.8 releases.
David
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Wei Mi w...@google.com wrote:
Yes, I think so.
Regards,
Wei.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Should the patch be ported to in 48 branch?
thanks,
David
On Wed, Jun
lgtm.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes a bad merge in r199218.
Removing cgraph noded in early-ipa should be allowed.
Otherwise, we got ICE in tree-eipa_sra with
-freorder-funtions=callgraph (without -fripa)
Tested with regressions and
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Xinliang David Li davi
Can you create a helper function to flag the error and perhaps also
put that check inside can_inline_edge_p ?
David
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi Honza,
I have isolated the ipa-inline.c part into a separate patch with a
test and attached
If you want to flag errors for all possible wrongly used always_inline
attribute, should this change be done in can_inline_edge_p? Or keep
your current change, but also add a warning (something like 'always
inline function is ignored etc') in inline_always_inline_functions
when inline
yes, what you said makes sense.
thanks,
David
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
If you want to flag errors for all possible wrongly used always_inline
attribute, should this change be done in can_inline_edge_p? Or keep
your current change, but also add a
Guard also with L_IPO_COMP_MODE as this is lipo specific.
David
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes a bug when two weakref symbols are mapped to a same
assembler name.
Testing on going.
OK for google branches if test is fine?
Thanks,
Dehao
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Hi, Martin,
Yes, your patch can fix my case. Thanks a lot for the fix.
With the fix, value profiling will still promote the wrong indirect
call
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:05 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Dehao Chen de
gimple_check_call_matching_types is called by check_ic_target. Instead
of moving the check out of this guard function, may be enhancing the
interface to allow it to guard with different strictness?
David
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Hi, Martin,
Yes, your
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 05:19:02PM -0700, Dehao Chen wrote:
attached is a testcase that would cause problem when source has changed:
$ g++ test.cc -O2 -fprofile-generate -DOLD
$ ./a.out
$ g++ test.cc -O2 -fprofile-use
We should make the default setting right for our environment. The
patch is trivial to maintain.
thanks,
David
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On 2013-06-06 16:22 , Teresa Johnson wrote:
The default for the max instructions in peeled loops was reduced
ok. Wht is the rational for dropping the limit in trunk? Ideally,
the limit should be lifted up and to enable other heuristics to kick
in.
David
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
The default for the max instructions in peeled loops was reduced on
.
* ipa-inline.c (early_inliner): Likewise.
* ipa-prop.c (update_indirect_edges_after_inlining): Likewise.
* cgraph.c (cgraph_create_edge_1): Likewise.
(cgraph_make_edge_direct): Likewise.
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote
Right, except that in the context of FDO/autoFDO, where this happens
the most (note in FDO case, it can happen with fresh profile too for
multi-threaded programs), it is not that important to handle -- the
mismatch path will never be executed, so why bother to inline and
bloat the code for it?
if
Richard's question is that inlining should deal with extra arguments
just fine -- those paths (the insane profile case) won't be executed
anyway. Do you have a case showing otherwise (i.e., the mismatch
upsets the compiler?)
David
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com
ok.
David
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Patch updated to set the iteration threshold to 10 for AutoFDO.
Performance test shows ok.
OK for google-4_8 branch?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/ipa-inline.c
wrote:
OK, I'll commit the early inline part.
Dehao
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
wrote:
The early inlining part is ok. The tracer optimization should be
revisited -- we should have more fine grain control on it (for
instance, based on FDO summary
== NODE_FREQUENCY_UNLIKELY_EXECUTED))
Performance testing on-going...
Dehao
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
OK, I'll commit the early inline part.
Dehao
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
wrote:
The early
(cgraph_node_name (callee)), callee-uid,
+ growth);
+want_inline = false;
+ }
else if (!cgraph_maybe_hot_edge_p (e))
{
if (dump_file)
Thanks,
Dehao
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
If the purpose of the fix is to filter early
ok.
David
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes an uninitialized memory error and a hashtable
comparison bug in AutoFDO.
Bootstrapped and passed regression test.
OK for google branches?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/auto-profile.c
Those cases you mentioned may lead to problems in inlining, indirect
target promotion transformations etc too, so it is better to use the
new guard against them.
David
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Duncan Sands baldr...@free.fr wrote:
Hi Dehao,
On 31/05/13 00:47, Dehao Chen wrote:
This
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch makes more strict check of call args to make sure the
number of args match.
Bootstrapped and passed regression tests.
OK for google branches?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/gimple-low.c
Ok. I think this is a useful patch for trunk too.
Thanks,
David
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
Testing passed. I forgot to include the documentation change in the first
patch:
Index: doc/invoke.texi
The early inlining part is ok. The tracer optimization should be
revisited -- we should have more fine grain control on it (for
instance, based on FDO summary -- but that should be common to
FDO/LIPO).
David
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
In gcc4-8, the max
ok.
David
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
Hi
Since b/8397853 has been fixed, the related tests now passed, so we can remove
them from powerpc64-grtev3-linux-gnu.xfail now.
Tested with ./buildit --run_tests.
OK for google 4.7 branch?
thanks
Carrot
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes a bug in exposed in LIPO build (ICE in copy tree node).
Tested with bookstrap and google internal benchmarks.
-Rong
2013-05-24 Rong Xu x...@google.com
Google ref b/8963414.
*
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Sharad Singhai sing...@google.com wrote:
if (flag_gcov_file)
{
- char *gcov_file_name
-= make_gcov_file_name (file_name, src-coverage.name);
+ if (flag_intermediate_format)
+/* Output the intermediate format without
Looks ok to me in general.
1) the parameter name is not ideal -- it is not callonce.
2) it might be better to extend the callonce parameter into
-ftest-coverage option such as -ftest-coverage=exec_once?
3) need documentation in invoke.texi
4) watch out for long lines.
cc Teresa.
David
On Tue,
The MV testing support includes 3 logical parts:
1) runtime APIs to check mocked CPU types and features
(__builtin_mock_cpu_supports ..)
2) runtime APIs to do CPU mocking;
3) compile time option to do lazy dispatching (instead of using IFUNC).
3) can be used to also support target without IFUNC
Looks good.
David
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
In AutoFDO, we early-inline callsites that was inlined in profiling
runs regardless of the size limit. With this change, the existing
ipa-inline tunings for AutoFDO is unnecessary: it's fine to just use
the
ok. Would be nicer if there is a way to tell this from other error cases though.
David
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
Is it only auto fdo that doesn't store the module info if the
This is not correct. current_module_id is used only in FE parsing.
The real question is why the decl is created, neither static nor external?
David
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixed google bug entry 6124850.
The usage of varpool_node has
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:40 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
On 2013-05-08 01:13 , Teresa Johnson wrote:
-static void
+void
emit_barrier_after_bb (basic_block bb)
{
rtx barrier = emit_barrier_after (BB_END (bb));
-
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
This is not correct. current_module_id is used only in FE parsing.
Suppose the var decl has correct flags and varpool_node can accept it,
a new
ok.
David
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch updated the unittest and doc for the new
-frecord-compilation-info-in-elf flag.
Bootstrapped and passed regression test.
OK for google-4_7 branch?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index:
, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
I suggest submitting the refactoring part of the changes to GCC trunk first.
thanks,
David
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes google bug 8397853 and targets google 4.7 branch.
In LIPO mode
Please do what Richard suggested. gcov_info_type can be obtained from
gcov_info_var decl.
David
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Carrot Wei
I suggest submitting the refactoring part of the changes to GCC trunk first.
thanks,
David
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes google bug 8397853 and targets google 4.7 branch.
In LIPO mode, when coverage_obj_init is called, cgraph_state is
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch changes to use context function name to replace function
id, which is not available in AutoFDO builds.
Why isn't func_id not available
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch changes to use context function name to replace function
id, which is not available in AutoFDO builds.
Why isn't func_id not available in autofdo builds? The func-id for the
the same function should remain the same
ok.
David
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Harshit Chopra hars...@google.com wrote:
Adding function name to the function_patch_* sections when
-ffunction-sections is provided. Helps in garbage collecting dead functions
with the help of linker.
Tested:
Tested using 'make -k check-gcc
Ok.
David
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Bootstrapped and passed regression tests.
Okay for google-4_7 and google-4_7 branches?
Thanks,
Dehao
2012-03-09 Rong Xu x...@google.com
* opts-global.c (lipo_save_cl_args): save -std option.
ok with benchmark testing.
Need to be in all google branches (47, 48 and main)
David
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch forbids modules to be imported as aux module if its --std
is different with the primary module.
Bootstrapped and passed
ok.
David
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
The ported patch:
r188371 | dehao | 2012-06-09 18:44:58 -0700 (Sat, 09 Jun 2012) | 13 lines
2012-06-10 Dehao Chen de...@google.com
Backport r188303 from google-4_7
* gcc/cgraph.c (cgraph_node): Add attribute
It might be better to submit this to trunk first.
thanks,
David
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Fixed a bug in the previous patch sent, where I did not check if the
switch section was actually to the cold function part. Updated patch
attached.
Hi, this is a follow up simple patch to support 'slim' graph dump:
when -slim option is specified (e.g,
-fdump-tree-optimized-graph-slim), do not dump the boby.
2013-04-22 Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
* cfghhooks.c (dump_bb_for_graph): Support 'slim' graph dump.
Index
Thanks. The patch is revised.
David
2013-04-20 Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
* graph.c (draw_cfg_node_succ_edges): Add branch probility as label.
* cfghhooks.c (dump_bb_for_graph): Dump profile count and frquency.
* Makefile.in: New dependency.
Index
Hi, the graph dump file currently does not show any profile
information. The following simple patch fixed that. Ok for trunk?
thanks,
David
2013-04-20 Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
* graph.c (draw_cfg_node): Add count and frequency info.
(draw_cfg_node_succ_edges
looks ok.
David
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
Patch to add interface for querying the profile directory prefix
specified to the -fprofile-generate= option.
Google ref b/8629045.
Tested with regression tests and internal test. Ok for google
https://codereview.appspot.com/8814043/diff/1/gcc/auto-profile.c
File gcc/auto-profile.c (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8814043/diff/1/gcc/auto-profile.c#newcode161
gcc/auto-profile.c:161: };
Why not sharing the same hist_type enum in value-prof.h?
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
wrote:
Great that it is already covered.
I expect that with more convoluted code you'll ICE eventually.
Yes, those are bugs that need
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:05:41PM -0700, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
I have attached a patch that fixes this. I have added an option
-mgenerate-builtins that will do two things. It will define a macro
__ALL_ISA__ which will
What is the compile time impact for turning it on? Code not including
the intrinsic headers should not be affected too much. If the impact
is small, why not turning on this option by default -- which seems to
be the behavior of ICC.
With this option, all functions without the appropriate target
Ok.
As followup, the profile generation tool should be moved into compiler
space to avoid format mismatch.
David
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch
1. Uses relative line offset (lineno - start_lineno_of_function) to
represent AutoFDO profile.
Great that it is already covered.
David
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
wrote:
What is the compile
yes -- Dehao first needs to rip out some internal dependencies for the
profile generation tool before it can be pushed upstream.
David
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Dehao Chen wrote:
Hi,
This patch
1. Uses
ok.
David
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fix the bug of sum_all, which is used in loop unroll. The
fix will suppress unrolling loops when the program is hot instruction
footprint is large.
Bootstrapped and passed regression tests.
Is
Ok for google branches.
thanks,
David
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Revised copyright info.
-Rong
2013-04-08 Rong Xu x...@google.com
* contrib/profile_merge.py: An offline profile merge tool.
Index: contrib/profile_merge.py
Ok -- there are legitimate use cases for this.
David
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
This patch is pending on trunk, but I would like to get this into google
branches now as it is causing spurious warnings.
Google ref b/8496800.
This patch allows
Ok.
thanks,
David
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch updates the function frequency after calculating branch
probability. This is important because cold function could be promoted
to hot after ipa-inline.
Bootstrapped and passed gcc
The copyright header is wrong. Please use the standard one for GCC.
David
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This is a offline profile merge program.
Usage: profile_merge.py [options] arg1 arg2 ...
Options:
-h, --helpshow this help message
ok.
thanks,
David
On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
This patch restores part of r196176, which was subsequently reverted
due to issues with the other part of that patch that dealt with
module info updates. This patch restores the option
ok.
David
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
forgot to attach the patch...
Index: gcc/ipa-prop.c
===
--- gcc/ipa-prop.c (revision 196984)
+++ gcc/ipa-prop.c (working copy)
@@ -2473,7 +2473,6
Interesting idea about lazy IFUNC relocation.
David
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 2:02 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch is meant for google/gcc-4_7 but I want this to be
considered
ok.
David
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Jing Yu jin...@google.com wrote:
Got new regression failures when using gold to run gcc regression
tests. The failures are related to LIPO (b/8397853).
Since LIPO won't be available for Powerpc64 target until the end of
2013Q2, mark these tests
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch is meant for google/gcc-4_7 but I want this to be
considered for trunk when it opens again. This patch makes it easy to
test for code coverage of multiversioned functions. Here is a
motivating
...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch is meant for google/gcc-4_7 but I want this to be
considered for trunk when it opens again. This patch makes
I am with you for simple cases where straightline code is generated.
Helper class will be very useful when control flow manipulation is
involved. People can simply just write 'straight line like code'
using gimple_label, goto_label etc without worrying about how split
blocks and create new cfg
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013, Diego Novillo wrote:
This patch adds an initial implementation for a new helper type for
generating GIMPLE statements.
I hope you'll forgive the naive newbie question: why is the gimplifier used
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de wrote:
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
I am with you for simple cases where straightline code is generated.
Helper class will be very useful when control flow manipulation is
involved. People can simply just write
Nice -- GCC LOC will be significantly reduced with these interfaces.
Using 'add' as interface name can be confusing -- new, or new_stmt, or
new_assignment/new_call etc might be better -- but we can delay the
bike shedding later.
David
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Diego Novillo
ok.
David
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes the incorrect dependency in Makefile.in.
Bootstrapped and passed regression test.
Okay for google-4_7 branch?
Thanks,
DehaoIndex:
gcc/Makefile.in
Looks good.
thanks,
David
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch changes the default lipo module grouping
algorithm from algoritm 0 (eager propagation algorithm)
to algorith 1 (inclusion_based priority algorithm).
It also changes the name
The following patch limit the depth for post-dom walk in the analysis
-- in the presence of complicated control flow, the analysis should
bail out sooner.
Bootstrapped on x86-64/linux. No regressions found. OK for trunk?
thanks,
David
2013-03-01 Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
Can you upload the new patch set?
David
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:50 PM, x...@google.com wrote:
https://codereview.appspot.com/7393058/diff/1/libgcc/dyn-ipa.c
File libgcc/dyn-ipa.c (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7393058/diff/1/libgcc/dyn-ipa.c#newcode77
libgcc/dyn-ipa.c:77: /*
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Matt m...@use.net wrote:
The attached patches do two things:
1. Backports a fix from trunk that eliminates bogus warning traces. On my
current codebase which links ~40MB of C++ with LTO, the bogus warning traces
are literally hundreds of lines.
What is the
Ok for the google branch -- please provide the patch details in svn
commit message (note that ChangeLog is not needed any more for the
branch).
David
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Matt Hargett m...@use.net wrote:
On Feb 14, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote
when split_segment is specified but the API does not exist, why not
making it fatal ? Will it crash at some point when the null pointer is
referenced later?
David
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
I have attached a patch for the reordering
ok.
thanks,
David
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Updated patch attached.
Thanks
Sri
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
wrote
ok. The same problem exists in google/main too.
David
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
This patch fixes a bad merge from google/integration to google/4_7.
Passes regression tests. Ok for google/4_7?
Thanks,
Teresa
2013-02-12 Teresa Johnson
ok.
thanks,
David
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Harshit Chopra hars...@google.com wrote:
2013-02-08 Harshit Chopra hars...@google.com
Porting revisions r183548, r183888, r186118, r192231, r193381.
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-common.c b/gcc/c-family/c-common.c
index
Looks fine. Why adding tests that are expected to fail? Are these
tests passing with trunk?
David
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov
maxim.kuvyr...@gmail.com wrote:
David,
This patch adds tests for inlining and devirtualization optimizations, some
of which are already in
I noticed that the traverse and traverse_noresize method takes
Argument as the first template parameter. It should be moved to be the
second after the callback. In most of the cases, the type of the
Argument can be deduced from the callsite, so that the user only need
to specify the callback:
ok.
thanks,
David
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov ppluzhni...@google.com wrote:
Back-port revision 194909 to google/gcc-4_7 branch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=194909
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54526
Google ref: b/7427993
Index:
, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
The code looks fine to me. Please consider David's comments about the
option name.
-Rong
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Is it better to change the option to something like:
split_segment|nosplit-segment
I saw only one test case fix patch from Paolo in trunk. Does this
patch include more local fixes?
David
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov ppluzhni...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
ok.
The patch as sent caused some
ok.
thanks,
David
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov ppluzhni...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
I saw only one test case fix patch from Paolo in trunk. Does this
patch include more local fixes?
There was an earlier
Need to document the parameter in doc/invoke.texi.
Ok with that change.
David
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch adjusts the single target indirect call promotion heuristics.
(1) it uses bb counts (bb_all), instead of count all which only counts
Is it better to change the option to something like:
split_segment|nosplit-segment
or split_segment=yes|no
David
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
Hi Rong,
The following patch modifies the behaviour of the linker plugin to
not create a separate
Ok for google branch, but it might be better to warn this at compile
time (more discussion needed for the trunk version).
David
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes an issue in r194725. The call to atmoic builtin
is emmitted regardless of
Is there a way to tell if the program is going to be multi-threaded?
If not, it might be useful to introduce a compiler option such as -fmt
which also enables -lpthread. Using tricks like weakrefs can
introduce unnecessary runtime overhead.
David
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 8:26 AM, David Edelsohn
It would be great if this can make into gcc4.8. The patch has close to
0 impact on code stability.
David
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi Honza,
In the other thread of discussion (similar patch in google-4_7
branch), you said you were thinking if to let
Kernel build does not link in libgcc, which defines the function.
David
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch updates the support for FDO build in linux kernel for gcc 4.7.
401 - 500 of 970 matches
Mail list logo
