On Tue, 26 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 5:50 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> > On 20/08/25 10:13 +0200, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
> > > This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back
This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to avoid
using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are now:
* stored directly if there is only one,
* within a dedicated _Bound_arg_storage otherwise.
_Bound_arg_storage is less expensive to instantiate and a
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 5:50 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> > On 20/08/25 10:13 +0200, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
> > > This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
> > > avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound a
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 20/08/25 10:13 +0200, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
> > This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
> > avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are
> > now:
> > * stored directly if there is only one
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 4:30 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 3:54 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
> >
> > > This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and
>
On 20/08/25 10:13 +0200, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are
now:
* stored directly if there is only one,
* within a dedicated _Bound_arg_storage otehrwise.
"otehr
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 3:54 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
>
> > This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
> > avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. I
On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 3:54 PM Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
>
> > This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
> > avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are
> > now:
> > * stored directly if there is
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, Tomasz Kamiński wrote:
> This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
> avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are
> now:
> * stored directly if there is only one,
> * within a dedicated _Bound_arg_storage otehrwise.
I
This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are
now:
* stored directly if there is only one,
* within a dedicated _Bound_arg_storage otehrwise.
_Bound_arg_storage holds each argument in an _Indexed_bou
This patch refactors the implementation of bind_front and bind_back to
avoid using std::tuple for argument storage. Instead, bound arguments are
now:
* stored directly if there is only one,
* within a dedicated _Bound_arg_storage otehrwise.
_Bound_arg_storage holds each argument in an _Indexed_bou
From: Philip Herron
This case:
let i = 1;
let j = i as i64;
'i' is meant to default to i32 but the inference was making both of these
i64 because the code was prefering coercion logic which can end up with a
default unify which causes the ?integer to unify with i64 making them both
i64.
es {...}" to "require is_invocable_v<>"
> * Adjust more whitespace.
> * Add more tests.
>
> Changes in v5:
> * Switch back to decltype(auto) returns
> * Adjust tests to verify that calls treat and all bound args
> as const.
> * Use "&&a
exports in summary.
* Change "noexcept(noexcept(...))" to noexcept(is_noexcept_invocable<>)
* Change "requires requires {...}" to "require is_invocable_v<>"
* Adjust more whitespace.
* Add more tests.
Changes in v5:
* Switch back to decltype(auto) returns
requires {...}" to "require is_invocable_v<>"
> * Adjust more whitespace.
> * Add more tests.
>
> Changes in v5:
> * Switch back to decltype(auto) returns
> * Adjust tests to verify that calls treat and all bound args
> as const.
> * Use &q
requires {...}" to "require is_invocable_v<>"
> * Adjust more whitespace.
> * Add more tests.
>
> Changes in v5:
> * Switch back to decltype(auto) returns
> * Adjust tests to verify that calls treat and all bound args
> as const.
> * Use &q
op= for _Bind_fn_t.
* Note no need for change to exports in summary.
* Change "noexcept(noexcept(...))" to noexcept(is_noexcept_invocable<>)
* Change "requires requires {...}" to "require is_invocable_v<>"
* Adjust more whitespace.
* Add more tests.
On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 11:27 AM Nathan Myers wrote:
> Stabilizing.
>
> Changes in v5:
> * Switch back to decltype(auto) returns
> * Adjust tests to verify that calls treat and all bound args
> as const.
> * Use "&&", "||" and "!"
Stabilizing.
Changes in v5:
* Switch back to decltype(auto) returns
* Adjust tests to verify that calls treat and all bound args
as const.
* Use "&&", "||" and "!" in preference to "and", "or" and "not"
in deference to
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 11:28 AM Tomasz Kaminski
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 9:22 AM Nathan Myers wrote:
>
>> This should be close to ready. However, std::is_invocable
>> and noexcept still fail oddly applied to the not_fp result.
>> The remaining failing test cases in */nttp.cc, commen
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 11:28 AM Tomasz Kaminski
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 9:22 AM Nathan Myers wrote:
>
>> This should be close to ready. However, std::is_invocable
>> and noexcept still fail oddly applied to the not_fp result.
>> The remaining failing test cases in */nttp.cc, commen
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 9:22 AM Nathan Myers wrote:
> This should be close to ready. However, std::is_invocable
> and noexcept still fail oddly applied to the not_fp result.
> The remaining failing test cases in */nttp.cc, commented
> out, need careful examination to see whether they should
> be
This should be close to ready. However, std::is_invocable
and noexcept still fail oddly applied to the not_fp result.
The remaining failing test cases in */nttp.cc, commented
out, need careful examination to see whether they should
be expecting different results given that the argument
function obj
This should be close to ready. However, std::is_invocable
and noexcept still fail oddly applied to the not_fp result.
The remaining failing test cases in */nttp.cc, commented
out, need careful examination to see whether they should
be expecting different results given that the argument
function obj
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 at 12:22, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 12:52 PM Nathan Myers wrote:
>>
>> * I rewrote the implementation to more closely resemble the
>> non-NTTP version, and fix the various noexcept and requires
>> omissions.
>
> I have a task to adjust them late
On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 12:52 PM Nathan Myers wrote:
> * I rewrote the implementation to more closely resemble the
> non-NTTP version, and fix the various noexcept and requires
> omissions.
>
I have a task to adjust them later, so the alignment may not be desired.
>
> * I don't understand wh
* I rewrote the implementation to more closely resemble the
non-NTTP version, and fix the various noexcept and requires
omissions.
* I don't understand what "a separate type for single argument
case, that correspond to function_ref nontype, ptr/ref constructor"
means, but I did make no-boun
From: Bob Duff
...because it breaks one test that uses --RTS=light.
"Is_Composite_Type" is needed; "not Is_Scalar_Type"
was wrong.
gcc/ada/ChangeLog:
* tbuild.adb (Unchecked_Convert_To): Back out
change.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on m
I have left some comments on the previous revision here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2025-July/062349.html
They do not seem to be addressed.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 9:13 PM Nathan Myers wrote:
> [Note: many of the tests for the original versions do not make
> sense, require different
[Note: many of the tests for the original versions do not make
sense, require different outcomes, or otherwise fail on the new
versions for reasons not obvious.]
Add non-type template parameter function-object/-pointer argument
versions of bind_front, bind_back, and not_fn as defined in P2714R1.
Hi!
As always, thank you :-)
On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 02:43:12PM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * lra-constraints.cc (process_address_1): When changing base reg
> on a reg of the base class, fall back to reload of whole inne
]: Fall back to reload of whole inner address in PR case and constrain iteration number of address reloads
gcc/ChangeLog:
* lra-constraints.cc (process_address_1): When changing base reg
on a reg of the base class, fall back to reload of whole inner address
To test forwarding, I would suggest using a by-value member:
struct F
{
quals operator()(int&) const { return { false, true }; }
quals operator()(int const&) const { return { true, true }; }
quals operator()(int&&) const { return { false, false }; }
quals operator()(int const&&)
On Tue, Jul 8, 2025 at 5:41 AM Nathan Myers wrote:
> This is a snapshot of work in progress, for reference.
> bind_front(...) is uglified directly from the sample
> implementation in P2714, at include/std/functional:1284 .
>
> Test failures:
>
> bind_front/1.cc:53: error: static assertion failed
This is a snapshot of work in progress, for reference.
bind_front(...) is uglified directly from the sample
implementation in P2714, at include/std/functional:1284 .
Test failures:
bind_front/1.cc:53: error: static assertion failed
bind_front/1.cc:57: error: static assertion failed
bind_front/1.c
From: Bob Duff
A previous change (commit 33eebd96d27fa2b29cec79f55167a11aaf7f4802)
removed code in Analyze_Object_Renaming that tranformed renamings
into object declarations. This reinstates that code.
Removing the code causes failures in
gnatbugs-large/2023/gnat-435_deep_blue_capital.
Ideally,
Signed-off-by: Xin Wang
---
gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.cc | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.cc b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.cc
index 225964c6215..de0450f5192 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-loop-im.cc
@@ -3355,6 +3355,9 @@ loop_suitable_for_s
he
> memcpy statement
> because optimize_memcpy_to_memset only looks back one statement. This can be
> fixed to look back
> until we get an statement that may clobber the reference. If we get a phi
> node, then we don't do
> anything.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_
only looks back one statement. This can be
fixed to look back
until we get an statement that may clobber the reference. If we get a phi
node, then we don't do
anything.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux-gnu.
PR tree-optimization/118947
gcc/ChangeLog:
* gimp
The case here is we have:
```
char buf[32] = {};
void* ret = aaa();
__builtin_memcpy(ret, buf, 32);
```
And buf does not escape. But we don't prop the zeroing from buf to the memcpy
statement
because optimize_memcpy_to_memset only looks back one statement. This can be
fixed to
imagemagick.
This patch sets the cost back to 3. Next stage1 we can untie addss from the
other operations
and set it correctly.
bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux and also benchmarked on SPEC2k17
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/119298
* config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h (znver5_cost): Set ADDSS
Backport a few of my patches from the trunk to GCC 14 release branch.
These all have been sitting on the trunk for some time now so it was time
to backport them before a release.
Andrew Pinski (6):
phiopt: Fix VCE moving by rewriting it into cast [PR116098]
aarch64: Fix early ra for -fno-delet
remove them in this patch.
Unlike AVX10.2 options, AVX10.1 options has been there in a major
release, so we have to raise a deprecate warning in GCC 15 and remove
them in GCC 16. At the same time, to align with avx10.2 options, we will
add just removed avx10.1 option back with warning to mention its
On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 6:37 AM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> The recently-approved Standard Library Hardening proposal (P3471R4)
> gives pop_front and pop_back member functions hardened preconditions,
> but std::list was missing assertions on them. Our other sequence
> containers do have assertions o
The recently-approved Standard Library Hardening proposal (P3471R4)
gives pop_front and pop_back member functions hardened preconditions,
but std::list was missing assertions on them. Our other sequence
containers do have assertions on those members.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/bits
Update
commit dd6247cb8fc11a15e23e949092f89d24ff329209
Author: H.J. Lu
Date: Fri Jan 31 12:29:04 2025 +0800
x86: Handle TARGET_INDIRECT_BRANCH_REGISTER for -fno-plt
to change "if (TARGET_X32 ...)" back to "else if (TARGET_X32 ...)".
PR target/118713
* config
assignment in the called procedure.
The proposal is to simply not generate the unpacking / copying-back code
if the actual argument has the PARAMETER attribute. Non-conforming code
should rather be either detected at compile-time (which we do to a
reasonable extent), or we might add (in the future) new
ent in the called procedure.
>
> The proposal is to simply not generate the unpacking / copying-back code
> if the actual argument has the PARAMETER attribute. Non-conforming code
> should rather be either detected at compile-time (which we do to a
> reasonable extent), or we might add (in
.
The proposal is to simply not generate the unpacking / copying-back code
if the actual argument has the PARAMETER attribute. Non-conforming code
should rather be either detected at compile-time (which we do to a
reasonable extent), or we might add (in the future) new checking code
that detects
d: Rewrite add_scope_conflicts_2 to use
> > cache and look back further [PR111422]
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 5:25 AM Andrew Pinski
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > After fixing loop-im to do the correct overflow rewriting
> > > for pointer ty
> -Original Message-
> From: Tamar Christina
> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2024 1:04 PM
> To: Richard Biener ; Andrew Pinski
>
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/3] cfgexpand: Rewrite add_scope_conflicts_2 to use
> cache and loo
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 11:28 AM
> To: Andrew Pinski
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] cfgexpand: Rewrite add_scope_conflicts_2 to use
> cache and look back further [PR111422]
>
&
On 12/14/24 5:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following patch implements what I've mentioned in the 64-bit
location_t thread.
struct tree_exp had unsigned condition_uid member added for something
rarely used (-fcondition-coverage) and even there used only on very small
subset of trees onl
Hi!
The following patch implements what I've mentioned in the 64-bit
location_t thread.
struct tree_exp had unsigned condition_uid member added for something
rarely used (-fcondition-coverage) and even there used only on very small
subset of trees only for the duration of the gimplification.
The
---
htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html
index 80604ab8..6c9ebaac 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-15/changes.html
@@ -29,7 +29,9 @@ a work-in-progress.
C
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 5:25 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> After fixing loop-im to do the correct overflow rewriting
> for pointer types too. We end up with code like:
> ```
> _9 = (unsigned long) &g;
> _84 = _9 + 18446744073709551615;
> _11 = _42 + _84;
> _44 = (signed char *) _11;
> ...
> *_44 = 1
it is to be handled by the back-end.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on master.
---
gcc/ada/exp_aggr.adb | 71
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ada/exp_aggr.adb b/gcc/ada/exp_aggr.adb
index c34df840401
After fixing loop-im to do the correct overflow rewriting
for pointer types too. We end up with code like:
```
_9 = (unsigned long) &g;
_84 = _9 + 18446744073709551615;
_11 = _42 + _84;
_44 = (signed char *) _11;
...
*_44 = 10;
g ={v} {CLOBBER(eos)};
...
n[0] = &f;
*_44 = 8;
g ={v} {CLOBBER(eos)};
body Sem_Ch3 is
Rewrite (Object_Definition (N), New_Occurrence_Of (Act_T, Loc));
Freeze_Before (N, Act_T);
- elsif Nkind (E) = N_Function_Call
-and then Constant_Present (N)
-and then Has_Unconstrained_Elements (Etype (E))
- then
- -- The back
On Sat, Nov 2, 2024 at 4:10 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> Sometimes we get back a full ssa name when looking up the comparison of the
> GIMPLE_COND
> rather than a predicate. We then want to lookup the `val != 0` for the
> predicate.
>
> Note this might happen with other bo
Sometimes we get back a full ssa name when looking up the comparison of the
GIMPLE_COND
rather than a predicate. We then want to lookup the `val != 0` for the
predicate.
Note this might happen with other boolean assignments and COND_EXPR but I am
not sure
if it is as important; I have not
target/i386/mvc10.c fails with -fPIE on ia32 because we omit the
> @PLT mark when calling an alias to an indirect function. Such aliases
> aren't marked as ifunc_resolvers in the cgraph, so the test that would
> have forced the PLT call fails.
> I've arranged for ifunc_resolver
From: Bob Duff
Temporarily disable the warning, because it breaks
SPARK continuous builder
gcc/ada/ChangeLog:
* sem_ch10.adb (Analyze_With_Clause): Temporarily disable warning.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on master.
---
gcc/ada/sem_ch10.adb | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 ins
Sorry I had missed calling the test case itself, so fixed that up,
rebased on master and committed.
->8--
Don't bail out early if the offset to a pointer in __builtin_object_size
is a variable, return the wholesize instead since that is a better
fallback for maximum estimate. This should
From: Mikael Morin
Bootstrapped and regression-tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
OK for master?
-- >8 --
Evaluate the BACK argument of MINLOC/MAXLOC once before the
scalarization loops in the case where the DIM argument is present.
This is a follow-up to r15-1
On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 12:40:29PM -0400, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> Don't bail out early if the offset to a pointer in __builtin_object_size
> is a variable, return the wholesize instead since that is a better
> fallback for maximum estimate. This should keep checks in place for
> fortified func
Don't bail out early if the offset to a pointer in __builtin_object_size
is a variable, return the wholesize instead since that is a better
fallback for maximum estimate. This should keep checks in place for
fortified functions to constrain overflows to at lesat some extent.
gcc/ChangeLog:
gcc.dg/vect/vect-pr111779.c is a case where non-SLP manages to vectorize
using VMAT_ELEMENTWISE but SLP currently refuses because doing a regular
access with permutes would cause excess vector loads with at most one
element used. The following makes us fall back to elementwise accesses
for that
ed_can_use_partial_vectors_p
-= LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo);
-
/* We don't expect to have to roll back to anything other than an empty
set of rgroups. */
gcc_assert (LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo).is_empty ());
- /* This is the point where we can re-s
AN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo);
-
/* We don't expect to have to roll back to anything other than an empty
set of rgroups. */
gcc_assert (LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo).is_empty ());
- /* This is the point where we can re-start analysis with SLP forced off. */
-start_over
mode fixed. */
+ if (applying_suggested_uf)
return ok;
/* If there are reduction chains re-trying will fail anyway. */
@@ -3268,8 +3268,9 @@ again:
dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
"re-trying with SLP disabled\n");
- /* Roll bac
h! It's good to see so much progress...
Best regards
Thomas
Thanks to you and Bernhard.
This is what I'm going to push.From 40122a405386a8b67c11bbaad523ffce5c1c7855 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mikael Morin
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:24:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] fortran: Supp
Hi Mikael,
+ gcc_assert (backexpr->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE);
drop it, downgrade to checking, or is it worth?
Whether it is worth it, I don't know; it's protecting the access to
backexpr->symtree a few lines down, idependently of the implementation
of maybe_absent_optional_variable.
From: Arnaud Charlet
gcc/ada/
* bindgen.adb (Gen_Main): Put back support for -G
* bindusg.adb (Display): Put back line for -G
* opt.ads (CCG_Mode): Update doc
* switch-b.adb (Scan_Binder_Switches): Put back support for -G
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed
On 27 July 2024 21:11:19 CEST, Mikael Morin wrote:
>Le 27/07/2024 à 19:23, rep.dot@gmail.com a écrit :
>> On 22 July 2024 20:53:18 CEST, Mikael Morin wrote:
>>> From: Mikael Morin
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> this fixes a null pointer der
Le 27/07/2024 à 19:23, rep.dot@gmail.com a écrit :
On 22 July 2024 20:53:18 CEST, Mikael Morin wrote:
From: Mikael Morin
Hello,
this fixes a null pointer dereference with absent optional dummy passed
as BACK argument of MINLOC/MAXLOC.
Tested for regression on x86_64-linux.
OK for
On 22 July 2024 20:53:18 CEST, Mikael Morin wrote:
>From: Mikael Morin
>
>Hello,
>
>this fixes a null pointer dereference with absent optional dummy passed
>as BACK argument of MINLOC/MAXLOC.
>
>Tested for regression on x86_64-linux.
>OK for master?
>
>-- >8
From: Mikael Morin
Hello,
this fixes a null pointer dereference with absent optional dummy passed
as BACK argument of MINLOC/MAXLOC.
Tested for regression on x86_64-linux.
OK for master?
-- >8 --
Protect the evaluation of BACK with a check that the reference is non-null
in case
d catch, thanks.
Thanks for the patch!
Thanks for the review.
Harald
-- 8< --
Move the evaluation of the BACK argument out of the loop in the inline
code
generated for MINLOC or MAXLOC. For that, add a new (scalar) element
associated with BACK to the scalarization loop chain, eval
ks for the patch!
Harald
-- 8< --
Move the evaluation of the BACK argument out of the loop in the inline code
generated for MINLOC or MAXLOC. For that, add a new (scalar) element
associated with BACK to the scalarization loop chain, evaluate the argument
with the context of that element
From: Mikael Morin
Hello,
I discovered this while testing the inline MINLOC/MAXLOC (aka PR90608) patches.
Regression tested on x86_64-linux.
OK for master?
-- 8< --
Move the evaluation of the BACK argument out of the loop in the inline code
generated for MINLOC or MAXLOC. For that, add a
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 09:03:26AM +, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I’ve tested the fix for PR 115618 from your commit r14-6612-g8d30107455f230
> on the GCC 13 branch.
> I’d like to back port it to that branch.
> Is there any problem with that I should be awar
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 10:30 AM liuhongt wrote:
>
> gcc/ChangeLog
In PR115659 Kewen notes that ISEL (and possibly folding) could do a
better job with
these. In addition to the mentioned issues we can also try whether the target
can handle an alternate mask mode. So instead of gating with
gcc/ChangeLog
PR target/115517
* config/i386/sse.md
(*_cvtmask2_not): New pre_reload
splitter.
(*_cvtmask2_not): Ditto.
(*avx2_pcmp3_6): Ditto.
(*avx2_pcmp3_7): Ditto.
---
gcc/config/i386/sse.md | 97 ++
Hi Andrew,
I’ve tested the fix for PR 115618 from your commit r14-6612-g8d30107455f230 on
the GCC 13 branch.
I’d like to back port it to that branch.
Is there any problem with that I should be aware of?
It applies cleanly and tests fine.
Thanks,
Kyrill
From: Piotr Trojanek
Code cleanup; semantics is unaffected.
gcc/ada/
* exp_put_image.adb (Build_Record_Put_Image_Procedure): Remove
useless conversions.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, committed on master.
---
gcc/ada/exp_put_image.adb | 6 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(
We have a sanity check in the irange storage code to make sure that
reading back a cache entry we have just written to yields exactly the
same range. There's no need to do this only for integers. This patch
moves the code to a more generic place.
However, doing so tickles a latent bug i
Thank you for the patch review! I'm including below the updated version.
I pushed this, thanks.
R.
--
Thiago
From 78e70788da5ed849d7828b0219d3aa8955ad0fea Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2024 14:28:07 -0300
Subject: [PATCH v2] testsuite: Turn erro
If that works, ok with that change.
I took the opportunity to request commit access to the GCC repo so that
I can commit the patch myself. Sorry for the delay. I'll commit it as
soon as I get it.
Thank you for the patch review! I'm including below the updated version.
--
Thiago
>From 7
On 13/01/2024 20:46, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Since commit 2c3db94d9fd ("c: Turn int-conversion warnings into
> permerrors") the test fails with errors such as:
>
> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/acle/cde-mve-error-2.c -O0 (test for errors, line
> 32)
> FAIL: gcc.target/arm/acle/cde-mve-error
> "Jeff" == Jeff Law writes:
>> I don't know how to fix this.
Jeff> Me neither, but I can suggest a hacky workaround.
FTR, I asked Jakub on irc and he fixed it, so thankfully I didn't have
to resort to the hack :-)
thanks,
Tom
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 5:35 PM Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> > "Andrew" == Andrew Pinski writes:
>
> Andrew> I don't know how to update the script server side after it is
> Andrew> committed in git. the checker script is located in git though:
>
> Thanks, I didn't realize it was there.
>
> Could you
> "Andrew" == Andrew Pinski writes:
Andrew> I don't know how to update the script server side after it is
Andrew> committed in git. the checker script is located in git though:
Thanks, I didn't realize it was there.
Could you check in your patch?
IMO it seems obvious.
Tom
ERR: invalid PR component in subject: "Fix PR libcc1/113977"
> >
> > I guess this script isn't in sync with the components in bugzilla.
> >
> > I don't know how to fix this.
> Me neither, but I can suggest a hacky workaround. Change the component
>
n bugzilla.
I don't know how to fix this.
Me neither, but I can suggest a hacky workaround. Change the component
in bugzilla to something the pre-commit hooks understand, push the fix,
then change the component back a little while later and adjust the
ChangeLog after it gets generated overnight. Ugly as sin.
jeff
> "Jeff" == Jeff Law writes:
Jeff> Given this is all libcc1 related and thus primarily of interest to
Jeff> gdb, if you're happy with it, then it's OK for the trunk.
Thank you.
I could not push this because:
remote: *** ChangeLog format failed:
remote: *** ERR: invalid PR component in subj
27;s not run at all, it's
also clear that removing it doesn't cause any regressions in gdb.
However, rather than remove it, this patch changes it to handle
ERROR_MARK better, and then to fall back to the v0 code if the new
code fails to find the type it's lookin
ear that removing it doesn't cause any regressions in gdb.
However, rather than remove it, this patch changes it to handle
ERROR_MARK better, and then to fall back to the v0 code if the new
code fails to find the type it's looking for.
2024-02-26 Tom Tromey
* libcc1plugin.cc (saf
Hi!
On 2018-12-12T11:52:52+, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> This patch contains the major part of the GCN back-end. [...]
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/config/gcn/gcn.c
> +void
> +gcn_hsa_declare_function_name (FILE *file, const char *name, tree)
> +{
> + /* Determine count o
Hi!
On 2018-12-12T11:52:52+, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> This patch contains the major part of the GCN back-end. [...]
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/config/gcn/gcn.h
> +#define FIRST_SGPR_REG 0
> +#define SGPR_REGNO(N)((N)+FIRST_SGPR_REG)
> +#de
1 - 100 of 690 matches
Mail list logo
