Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Sandiford [mailto:richard.sandif...@arm.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2020 12:01 AM
> To: Yangfei (Felix)
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Uros Bizjak ; Jakub
> Jelinek ; Hongtao Liu ; H.J. Lu
>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH PR95254] aarch64: gcc generate
> Hi,
>
>
> PRs from the second group were filed by me, so if there's consensus to
> close all
> of them, the ones from this second group I can close myself. I don't have
> the
> right permissions to modify PRs reported by someone else, so I'd like to
> ask a
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70053
--- Comment #9 from luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Segher Boessenkool from comment #8)
> I see no conversion there?
>
> But, why does it it store to memory at all?
Yes, no conversion for this case, only adjust_address to TImode.
resend the patch for stage1:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-January/538186.html
The performance of exchange2 built with PGO will decrease ~28% by r278808
due to profile count set incorrectly. The cloned nodes are updated to a
very small count caused later pass cunroll fail to
Pushed.
---
htdocs/readings.html | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/readings.html b/htdocs/readings.html
index 3d654a37..2488ca9d 100644
--- a/htdocs/readings.html
+++ b/htdocs/readings.html
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ names.
arc
Manufacturer: Synopsys Inc (as
My first libstdc+++ commit in the new (ChangeLog) new (Git) world
order, so particularly happy for advise on any mistakes or potential
improvements.
(Apart from the stray change that sneaked into the .xml file in the
last minute somehow :-( -- that one's resolved already.)
Pushed.
Gerald
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/readings.html | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/readings.html b/htdocs/readings.html
index 09420335..3d654a37 100644
--- a/htdocs/readings.html
+++ b/htdocs/readings.html
@@ -94,7 +94,6 @@ names.
Blackfin
Manufacturer: Analog Devices
-
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html
index 536ab6c0..efa322b1 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html
@@ -1084,7 +1084,7 @@ are not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95444
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95151
Bug 95151 depends on bug 95444, which changed state.
Bug 95444 Summary: Incorrect constraints on length operand in cmpstrnqi patterns
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95444
What|Removed |Added
We used to expand memcmp to "repz cmpsb" via cmpstrnsi. It was changed
by
commit 9b0f6f5e511ca512e4faeabc81d2fd3abad9b02f
Author: Nick Clifton
Date: Fri Aug 12 16:26:11 2011 +
builtins.c (expand_builtin_memcmp): Do not use cmpstrnsi pattern.
* builtins.c
We used to expand memcmp to "repz cmpsb" via cmpstrnsi. It was changed
by
commit 9b0f6f5e511ca512e4faeabc81d2fd3abad9b02f
Author: Nick Clifton
Date: Fri Aug 12 16:26:11 2011 +
builtins.c (expand_builtin_memcmp): Do not use cmpstrnsi pattern.
* builtins.c
cmpstrnsi expander may pass the actual string length directly to cmpstrnqi
patterns. For cmpstrnsi, one of the strings must be a constant and
expand_builtin_strncmp rewrites the length argument to be the minimum of
the const string length and the actual string length. But it is not the
case for
Hi,
In the removal of arm-wrs-vxworks, the default cpu was updated from arm8
to armv7-a, but this is not recognized as a valid -mcpu target. There
is however generic-armv7-a, which was likely the intended cpu that
should have been used instead.
Tested by building a cross-compiler targetting
Snapshot gcc-11-20200531 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20200531/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #6)
> Thomas,
>
> Contrary to my other libgfortran contribution, I was under the impression
> that the patch touches only deep architectural details of the x87 chip,
I noticed we have a tendency of using overly long language in
our process documentation. This is a first step a simplifying
(and trimming).
Pushed.
Gerald
---
htdocs/gitwrite.html | 24 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:46:34PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> The C++ parser already tracks function call parens matching, but the C
> parser doesn't. This adds the same functionality to the C parser and adds
> a testcase showing the C++ and C parser matching function call parens
> in an error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #8 from Markus Böck ---
Tested the above patch and the build failure is gone now
Hi,
On 31/05/2020 22:24, Xavier Del Campo Romero wrote:
Hi David,
-Wsizeof-pointer-div isn't required by the standard, so any compiler
other than gcc or clang is not required to emit anything to the user. In
such compilers, the security risk would still be there and would be up
to the
On 31/05/2020 22:53, Stafford Horne wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:19:16PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> Support for OpenRISC target was added in SVN r265963.
>>
>> The target configurations were taken from the list of supported
>> toolchains[1], so seems sensible to include them all.
>>
>>
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 12:19:16PM +0200, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Support for OpenRISC target was added in SVN r265963.
>
> The target configurations were taken from the list of supported
> toolchains[1], so seems sensible to include them all.
>
> OK?
>
> Regards
> Iain
>
> [1]:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #35 from wschmidt at linux dot ibm.com ---
Hi Jeff,
Just a quick comment. We should never discuss raw runtimes of SPEC
benchmarks on Power hardware in public. It's okay to talk about
improvements (>12% in this case), but not wall
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 03:14:02PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Mai 26 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
>
> > subprocess.check_output('git show --name-only --pretty="" | '
> > 'grep ChangeLog | '
>
> git show --name-only --pretty= -- '*ChangeLog*'
Or even
Hi David,
-Wsizeof-pointer-div isn't required by the standard, so any compiler other than
gcc or clang is not required to emit anything to the user. In such compilers,
the security risk would still be there and would be up to the maintainers'
willingness to implement such feature (or
Hi,
Diagnosing bad uses of 'return' in coroutines is somewhat
tricky, since the user can use the keyword before we know
that the function is a coroutine (where such returns are not
permitted). At present, we are just doing a check for any
use of 'return' and erroring on that. However, we can't
Hello team,
I just wanted to give an update to my current progress. I spent most of the
time looking over OMPD documentation again and studying LLVM's approach to
it.
> >
> > If it is all the same, and since I am familiar with working on github,
> may
> > I work on github? I took the liberty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95420
--- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw ---
With some confidence, I'm going to say that the intended cpu that should have
been set is "generic-armv7-a", and not "armv7-a".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 48649
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48649=edit
Untested patch.
Can someone with an access to MinGW target please test the attached patch?
The layout is defined by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95087
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1bb808504643e6c3c0df0fdd68a941ed2a64c7f0
commit r11-758-g1bb808504643e6c3c0df0fdd68a941ed2a64c7f0
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Sun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #3)
> Adding the author of the patch.
>
> Uros: I find no discussion of this patch on the fortran mailing list.
> Please remember to do so in the future if you touch
Hi,
The build_new_method_call allows us to inspect the function decl used.
In most cases, this is not used and effectively is a set but not used value.
We can just set the parm to NULL.
tested on x86_64-darwin, linux, powerpc64-linux
pushed to master,
thanks
Iain
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Looks like:
>unsigned short int __cs_selector;
> - unsigned short int __opcode;
> + unsigned int __opcode:11;
> + unsigned int __unused4:5;
>
> For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like:
unsigned short int __cs_selector;
- unsigned short int __opcode;
+ unsigned int __opcode:11;
+ unsigned int __unused4:5;
For Windows ABI, the int causes the bitfield to start at the next
PING
-- Forwarded message -
From: Aldy Hernandez
Date: Mon, May 18, 2020 at 7:59 PM
Subject: [patch] substitute_and_fold_engine merge with evrp domwalker
To: Jeff Law
Cc: gcc-patches
Howdy.
The main evrp domwalker seems cut and pasted from the
substitute_and_fold_engine (or
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 7:31 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 20:11 +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > As a follow-up to the patch moving array bounds checking into its own
> > class, this moves the class into its own files. As I've mentioned
> > previously, having it in tree-vrp just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95379
--- Comment #15 from Asher Gordon ---
(In reply to Luc Van Oostenryck from comment #14)
> I've now changed Sparse's default so that these warnings are not issued
> anymore.
Thanks Luc.
(In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #7)
> The feature was
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95454
Bug ID: 95454
Summary: type-level nodiscard not applied to constructors
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
On Mon, 2020-06-01 at 02:28 +0900, Oleg Endo wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 11:20 -0600, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > The peephole2 pass makes some attempt to update various notes, but that
> > doesn't
> > include REG_INC notes. While I could trivially fix this in the H8
On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 20:08 +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> We already moved the value_range class into its own class in the last
> release. I think it's time to move the value_range_equiv stuff into its
> own class, as it's a distraction from the VRP code.
>
> I've moved it to
On Mon, 2020-05-18 at 20:11 +0200, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> As a follow-up to the patch moving array bounds checking into its own
> class, this moves the class into its own files. As I've mentioned
> previously, having it in tree-vrp just pollutes the file with unrelated
> stuff.
>
> Jeff, I
Hi Jeff,
On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 11:20 -0600, Jeff Law via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> The peephole2 pass makes some attempt to update various notes, but that
> doesn't
> include REG_INC notes. While I could trivially fix this in the H8 port, I
> wouldn't be terribly surprised if the lack of a
On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 12:19 +0200, Iain Buclaw via Gcc-patches wrote:
> This comment was added in SVN r173410, v850e1-* was added to config.sub
> in SVN r174691i (around 2011). So it should no longer apply.
>
> OK?
>
> Regards
> Iain
>
> ---
> contrib/ChangeLog:
>
> * config-list.mk
On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 12:19 +0200, Iain Buclaw via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Support for OpenRISC target was added in SVN r265963.
>
> The target configurations were taken from the list of supported
> toolchains[1], so seems sensible to include them all.
>
> OK?
>
> Regards
> Iain
>
> [1]:
On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 12:02 +0200, Iain Buclaw via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Continuing from the previous update to config-list.mk, I realize that
> there are a few other more additions/removals to be done.
>
> To start off, support for crisv32-*-* and cris-*-linux* was removed in
> git
On Sun, 2020-05-31 at 12:15 +0200, Iain Buclaw via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Support for arm-wrs-vxworks was removed in git 27204060db5/r10-4684.
>
> Looking at the commit, it seems that it can instead be replaced with
> arm-wrs-vxworks7, however this target doesn't pass selftests due to an
>
The H8 recently started regressing 20071219-1.c on the H8/SX with -mint32. I
didn't really dig into what change caused the regression. While I recently
changed this peephole, it was just collapsing 3 patterns into 1 using mode
iterators. So more likely something earlier in the pipeline just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95426
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ABI
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
Hi,
this patch removes some abstraction around streaming references which
makes it difficult to play with the format of actual streamed
references. They are alway spair of integers, one represents the tag
and other is index. So I separated code computing them to common place
followed by the uhwi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92838
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95426
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Aha - thanks.
Re-reading
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/jit/topics/contexts.html#debugging
it looks like the documentation for these entrypoints could use some
clarification on whether each one relates to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95426
--- Comment #2 from bouanto at zoho dot com ---
Created attachment 48648
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48648=edit
Reproducer for the bug
Oh, I see what I was doing wrong: I thought it was an option, so I was calling
this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95453
Bug ID: 95453
Summary: Failure to avoid useless sign extension
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95452
Bug ID: 95452
Summary: Overflow Bug in GNAT Heapsort implementations
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95451
--- Comment #1 from Max ---
I just noted this is a duplicate of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90480, although the other bug
report neither mentions the workaround nor 86594. I guess I need to improve my
search skills :/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95451
Bug ID: 95451
Summary: [8/9/10 regression] ICE for lambda capturing this and
calling operator()
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95426
--- Comment #1 from David Malcolm ---
gcc_jit_context_dump_reproducer_to_file runs in the testsuite, and I see it
generating sane-looking reproducers (with non-empty create_code functions).
Are you calling
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Avi Kivity from comment #22)
> @Iain: if you can publish your patches somewhere we can test them with our
> codebase and report.
>
> (if you can publish them on releases/gcc-10 that's even
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95450
Bug ID: 95450
Summary: [10 regression] Wrong long double folding
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
--- Comment #3 from Pádraig Brady ---
I've not got a reduced example where clang is generating the call, but it could
be a linker issue as the two constructors are aliased to the same address.
The linker used here was lld.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95449
Lars Bonnichsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #48646|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #22 from Avi Kivity ---
@Iain: if you can publish your patches somewhere we can test them with our
codebase and report.
(if you can publish them on releases/gcc-10 that's even better).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95449
Bug ID: 95449
Summary: void_t does not work with some uses of vector_size
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95428
--- Comment #2 from Pádraig Brady ---
The test case is in bug #70462.
Copying here...
g++ -std=c++11 -c -o t.o -x c++ - << EOF
struct Bar final
{
Bar();
};
Bar::Bar()
{}
EOF
$ nm t.o | grep C2 || echo ABI issue
On неделя, 31 май 2020 г. 13:17:21 EEST Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Support for the TI PRU target was added in SVN r272202.
>
> Judging from the testsuite results posted at the time[1], the only
> supported target is pru-elf.
>
> OK?
>
> Regards
> Iain.
>
> [1]:
Pushed.
---
htdocs/git.html | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/htdocs/git.html b/htdocs/git.html
index bec93ead..8c28bc02 100644
--- a/htdocs/git.html
+++ b/htdocs/git.html
@@ -146,12 +146,12 @@ series, Y is always nonzero and Z is
always zero for
a
Hi,
The target files tilegx/mul-tables.c and tilepri/mul-tables.c were
updated in SVN r255743, but the generator file that produces them
wasn't, so it was reverting this change during builds.
Only tested by running make all-gcc for all tile*-*-* targets present in
config-list.mk.
OK?
Regards
The tile*-*-* targets were marked as obsolete in SVN r259724.
OK?
Regards
Iain
---
contrib/ChangeLog:
* config-list.mk (LIST): Add OPT-enable-obsolete to tilegx-linux-gnu,
tilegxbe-linux-gnu, and tilepro-linux-gnu.
---
contrib/config-list.mk | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2
This comment was added in SVN r173410, v850e1-* was added to config.sub
in SVN r174691i (around 2011). So it should no longer apply.
OK?
Regards
Iain
---
contrib/ChangeLog:
* config-list.mk (LIST): Add v850e1-elf.
---
contrib/config-list.mk | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2
Support for OpenRISC target was added in SVN r265963.
The target configurations were taken from the list of supported
toolchains[1], so seems sensible to include them all.
OK?
Regards
Iain
[1]: https://www.openrisc.io/software
---
contrib/ChangeLog:
* config-list.mk (LIST): Add
Support for the TI PRU target was added in SVN r272202.
Judging from the testsuite results posted at the time[1], the only
supported target is pru-elf.
OK?
Regards
Iain.
[1]: http://dinux.eu/gnupru/testresults/index.html
---
contrib/ChangeLog:
* config-list.mk (LIST): Add pru-elf.
Support for arm-wrs-vxworks was removed in git 27204060db5/r10-4684.
Looking at the commit, it seems that it can instead be replaced with
arm-wrs-vxworks7, however this target doesn't pass selftests due to an
unrecognized CPU (PR 95420). Nor does the previous default CPU work
either
Hi,
Continuing from the previous update to config-list.mk, I realize that
there are a few other more additions/removals to be done.
To start off, support for crisv32-*-* and cris-*-linux* was removed in
git 2b36e4dc813/r11-214.
OK?
Regards
Iain
---
contrib/ChangeLog:
* config-list.mk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94361
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Thomas Kथà¤nig :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:811f902b764c5a13178cbd7588e96c16b3fab504
commit r11-749-g811f902b764c5a13178cbd7588e96c16b3fab504
Author: Thomas Koenig
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95052
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dc8c02ca1cd18f8c22d70cf17b47125fc25ab243
commit r11-748-gdc8c02ca1cd18f8c22d70cf17b47125fc25ab243
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95418
--- Comment #2 from Markus Böck ---
I printed the size of the struct and it yielded 36. Interestingly, using clang
instead yields 32 like on Linux
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95446
--- Comment #2 from Martin Diehl ---
many thanks for the quick reply!
82 matches
Mail list logo
