Hi,
(I'm CCing the gcc mailing list too since I suppose it is an accident
that it wasn't in the message I'm replying to)
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:22:27AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Consequentely you need to track to
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 01:21:29AM -0700, Sharad Singhai wrote:
Hi,
This is a solicitation for help in converting passes to use the new
dump infrastructure. More context below.
thanks for the email. I hoped you'd summarize what the long thread
about this (that I lost track of) led to.
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 09:01:53AM +, Yangyueming wrote:
Hi, all
I do the research of min max instructions recently. I find it is related with
phiopt.
case1:
int foo(short a ,short b)
{
if (a b)
a = b;
return a;
}
It is successed in pass phiopt1(-O2 with gcc
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 09:32:48PM -0800, Handong Ye wrote:
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 09:01:53AM +, Yangyueming wrote:
Hi, all
...
But when I do the test for a case with a little change, it is failed
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 05:12:15PM -0800, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Diego and I seek your comments on the following (loose) proposal.
It is sometimes hard to remember which printing function is used
for debugging a type, or even which type you have.
Yeah, from time to time a still need to
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 08:08:52AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
So you do not plan to replace/rename at least some of them? This
seems like unnecessary and confusing layering just to avoid the work
to do the right
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:19:41AM -0800, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
On 11/19/12, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
On Nov 19, 2012 Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
So, yes, the larger layouting should be determined by name of the
dump function. A flag argument might look nice from an
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:12:17PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote:
In this day and age of rich-text capable mailers, restricting postings
to be text-only seems quaint and antiquated. Are there any hard
requirements
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 07:25:34PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Hello,
While trying to bootstrap with GCAC checking enabled and some
instrumentation to measure how often objects are being marked, I
noticed that a lot of cache misses happen because already-marked
objects are being
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:44:07AM -0500, Chassin wrote:
Hi again , this time i am trying to clone a function then insert it
with new name
If you want to create a clone of a function including its body, you
probably want to use cgraph_function_versioning. See how it is used
in
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 01:37:28PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
I'm trying to make IL verifying more streamlined - it's often
that passes have some random (or no) verification in their TODO
which makes pinning down issues to specific passes hard.
Thus I propose to unify the various
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:00:52PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
Hi,
The current implementation of IPACP doesn't allowed to clone function
if caller(s) to that function is located in another object.
That is not exactly true. With -fipa-cp-clone (default at -O3),
IPA-CP is happy to
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:28:49PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 04:00:52PM +0400, Dinar Temirbulatov wrote:
...
Here is what I mean:
int func(int
Hi everyone, but especially Diego :-)
it seems to me that our new C++ vectors have some problems holding
derived classes. For example, when try to compile the following
struct zzzA
{
int kind;
};
struct zzzB : public zzzA
{
int some, data, here;
};
struct container
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 09:55:14AM +0200, Veres Lajos wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Ondrej Bilka wrote:
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 12:41:42AM +0200, Veres Lajos wrote:
Hi,
I wrote a small misspell finder/fixer script and when I have a little
spare time I clean OS projects with it.
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 04:43:00AM +0200, Veres Lajos wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Veres Lajos wrote:
Around 99% of the typos are in comments and documentations a few of them
are only in function/variable names (living code).
I think it is not really history obtrusive.
I will
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:52:30PM -0300, Rodolfo Guilherme Wottrich wrote:
Hello there,
Please disregard this message in case it doesn't fit here.
During compilation of a C file, I need to be able to create a global
function definition, with whatever a body I may have forged. I mean,
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 03:17:08PM -0300, Rodolfo Guilherme Wottrich wrote:
Hello,
Thanks! I had solved the problem some days ago, and it was actually
related to your answer.
First, I hadn't used push_struct_function() to allocate storage for my
new function.
Second, I wasn't calling
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 08:42:16AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Hi,
I would like to suggest that new implementation files have
the '.cc' extension, unless they are meant to be processed
with a C compiler. (I am not proposing wholesale renaming.)
I do not care very much but I disagree.
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:13:22AM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
I do not care very much but I disagree. Having some files with .c
suffix and some
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:07:52AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
As far as newbies are concerned, I think that grasping that .c files
are C++ files is one of the easy things to learn about GCC compared to
other
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:00:13AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
At a minimum, I do think that if a .h file *requires* another .h
file to compile, that it should include it.
Absolutely.
ie, if gimple-ssa.h is
included, it wont compile unless tree-ssa-operands.h has already
been
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:19:26PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
Sorry. Which one?
I believe richi meant
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849180
Martin
partners (hint! hint!) would raise this issue via the
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:36:47PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:19:26PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
As my bugreport is being ignored it would help if one ouf our
Sorry
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 11:22:22AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
Summary: Devirtualization uses type information to determine if a
virtual method is reachable from a call site. If type information
indicates that it is not, devirt marks the site as unreachable. I
think this is wrong, and
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:26:43PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
I've recently discovered that a function marked always_inline but
called by pointer won't always be inlined. What would it take to
assure that this either always happens or generates an error?
Generally, that is the case.
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 03:31:23PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
On 07/18/2014 04:55 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:26:43PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
I've recently discovered that a function marked always_inline but
called by pointer won't always be inlined
Hi Arnaud and Robert,
I have not been able to bootstrap pristine gcc trunk this morning
(rev. 213544) with Ada enabled. I have set up a bisecting script
which has pointed to revision 213541 as the first failing one (if you
use git mirror, it is git commit
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:34:16AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
...
Btw, isn't cgraph edge redirection a transform step? Thus why is
it performed at WPA time at all? Shouldn't it be performed at LTRANS
time the same time we materialize clones and inline?
No, not really, changing
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 03:12:10AM +0530, Vini Kanvar wrote:
I am trying to compare the tree declarations of the lhs and the rhs of
the assignment statement in the following program.
struct node {
struct node * next;
};
struct node ** obj1, obj2;
obj1 = obj2.next;
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 06:48:53PM -0500, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
Hi,
I recently contributed some fixes against GCC trunk, gcc-4_9-branch, and
gcc-4_8-branch for which I need the requisite legal paperwork.
However, I'd like to backport these particular fixes to the MacPorts
Project's
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 07:40:19PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Summary
===
We are closing in on Stage 3, previously announced for September 10th.
At this point, I'm not aware of any reason to delay that date. Are
there any Stage 2 patches that people don't think will be submitted
Hi,
when trying to analyse dynamically allocated objects in C++, I came
across the need to identify results of the new operator (at least the
non-overridden standard one) as malloc-allocated. The cleanest
approach would probably be to mark the new operator function with the
malloc
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 10:16:41PM +0200, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Chris Lattner wrote:
I understand, but allowing users to override new means that the actual
implementation may not honor the aliasing guarantees of attribute malloc.
-Chris
Maybe it could make sense to give the
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 06:30:33PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Sep 7, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
when trying to analyse dynamically allocated objects in C++, I came
across the need to identify results of the new operator (at least the
non-overridden standard one
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 07:45:32AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 12:57:13AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
I seem to remember we had had this discussion before -- in connection
with optimizations related to 'malloc' attribute -- and decided not to
apply the attribute
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 12:56:25PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
For a particular implementation of operator new (such as the one in
libstdc++), you can of course make it safe in the same way as malloc;
hide the implementation somewhere the rest of the program can't see it
(modulo LTO).
Hi,
thanks for looking at the patch.
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 11:42:55AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Martin Jambor wrote:
Well, there's mine :-) Specifically, its the Switch initializations
conversion: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg00215.html
Do you have an FSF copyright
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 11:42:55AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Other than that, the patch looks pretty good to me. However, I'd like a
middle-end maintainer to review the patch. Ian, Diego, Roger, would one
of you please take a look?
Well... ping?
to use the --param mechanism. Our policy
Hi,
On Nov 16, 2007 6:45 PM, Diego Novillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Richard Kenner wrote:
As was said before, the difficultly in people working with GCC is
primarily lack of adequate documentation. Creating a plugin interface
is certainly much more fun than writing documentation, but
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 06:13:37PM -0500, Rob Johnson wrote:
I'm experimenting with the gimple plugin infrastructure and I'm having
trouble instrumenting code in a way that is compatible with the optimizer.
Here's a simple example that is intended to insert the function call
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 02:02:26PM +0530, Jaishri wrote:
Hi,
I am beginner in GCC. I want to make few changes in source code. What are
the steps that I need to do to get the changes in effect and to test the
changes?
Any help is appreciated.
It's all on the web and wiki.
Configuring and
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 10:38:24AM +0100, Feng LI wrote:
Hi,
I'm building a function with
fread = build_decl (LOCATION, FUNCTION_DECL, get_identifier (name), type);
and then use it in gimple with
gimple gfread = gimple_build_call (fread, 1, offset);
gimple_call_set_lhs (fread, lhs);
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 01:57:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
I am using 'ipa_modify_formal_parameters()' to change the type of a function's
formal parameter. After my pass completes, I get a 'gimple_expand_cfg()'
error. I must be missing some key piece here, as the failure points to a NULL
wrote:
Hi Martin and thank you very much for your reply. I do have some more
resolution to my issue.
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 01:57:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
I am using 'ipa_modify_formal_parameters
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 08:26:06PM +0100, Toon Moene wrote:
On 02/09/2012 07:16 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
Yes. Debian moved everything for some reason. It's a problem that must
be addressed somehow before gcc 4.7 is released.
It's extremely unfortunate that this will make it
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 02:07:17PM +1100, Matt Davis wrote:
Hello,
In my transformation of an input program, I need to clone functions
and the callee functions in each clone. To clone a function, or
create a duplicate, I use cgraph_function_versioning() This works
perfectly well for
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 01:34:55AM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Hello Everyone,
I am currently trying to take certain functions (marked by certain
attributes) and create vector version along with the scalar versions
of the function. For example, let's say I have a function my_add
that is
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 03:57:44PM +, Jay K wrote:
Our front end is wierd.
The input is unusually low level, and so are the trees it produces.
I do have a hankering to fix that (or maybe just to output more portable C...)
But for now:
It doesn't use component_refs, and doesn't
this special casing of FDESC_EXPRs
in the midle end (I hope that all platforms that use it use it in the
same way, I only know ia64...)
Thanks,
Martin
2012-08-06 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* gimple-fold.c (gimple_fold_stmt_to_constant_1): Also fold
assignments of V_C_Es
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 03:14:21PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
I've had this flagged to look at later for quite long now...
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 07:34:24AM +, Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan
wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 10:50:17PM +, Paul Brook wrote:
AFAIK the only reason we don't break this rule is that doing so would
be grossly inefficient; there's nothing to stop any gcc back-end with
(say) seriously slow DImode writes from using two SImode writes instead.
I'm fairly sure
Hi,
I've been rebootstrapping my switch conversion patch (which is still
waiting for review) to make sure it still works. Unfortunately, it
did not. The error given was the following and I believe this is the
warning introduced by Ian as a response to the infamous CERT advisory.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 05:59:54PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
The warnings I added for the CERT advisory say assuming pointer
wraparound does not occur You are running into one of the older
signed overflow warnings.
Oh, sorry for that oversight. It has started happening (when
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 04:35:51PM -0300, Diego Novillo wrote:
While doing the final trunk-tuples merge, I was surprised to find several
changes to the inliner and IPA cprop that I was convinced were not going to
happen until after the branch was merged.
I'm sorry this turned out this
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:24:13PM +0200, Martin Schindewolf wrote:
Dear all,
my current efforts to get some basic support for transactional memory in
GCC advance slowly but there is one thing I would like to ask because it
stopped me for days now. What is the best way to do the
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 04:01:13PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
This new failure seems to have been caused by r141613:
+2008-11-05 Martin Jambor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+
+ PR middle-end/37861
+ * tree-ssa-forwprop.c (forward_propagate_addr_expr_1): Don't turn
+ pointer
regressions.
If you get a chance, can you please test it for me on the affected
arch?
Thanks,
Martin
2008-11-07 Martin Jambor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* tree-ssa-forwprop.c (forward_propagate_addr_expr_1): Do not check
for INDIRECT_REFs
Hi,
today I have encountered an unpleasant problem with the function
get_ref_base_and_extent() when it claimed a known and constant offset
for the expression insn_4(D)-u.fld[arg.82_3].rt_rtvec. (arg being a
default_def parameter of the function, insn is an rtx). Moreover, it
also
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:26:38PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:29 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
today I have encountered an unpleasant problem with the function
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 03:05:32PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
In this particular case, the ofset of var_array + its max_size (the
size of its element, as the function computes it, this is something I
also do not really understand)
No, it's not the element size, it's the size of the whole
Hi,
I have found the testcase gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/noncompile/920507-1.c
failing when I was testing my new SRA. The testcase is quite simple,
should error out but no longer does:
int *
x(void)
{
register int *a asm(unknown_register); /* { dg-error
Hi,
in order to implement all sorts of IPA-devirtualization in WHOPR, I
need to store type of OBJ_TYPE_REF_OBJECT when streaming a call graph
edge. I assume that lto_output_tree and lto_input_tree are what I
need to use. Unfortunately, I have not been really able to use neither.
The problem
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:48:44AM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
I've been using the attached in debug sessions a lot (and I have
similar patch for the cgraph).
I'd be interested in that, can you post it as well?
I meant to write something like that for myself a few times but in the
end
Hi,
I have run the testcase with the early inliner disabled and noticed
that gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c XPASSes with early inlining and
XFAILs without it. The reason for the (expected) failure is that
IPA-CP removes a parameter which is constant (but also unused?). I
reckon this is the
trivia for now),
Martin
2010-03-30 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* inline-params.c: Disable early inlining.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:14:16AM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:43:39AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I have run the testcase with the early inliner disabled and noticed
that gcc.dg/guality
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 01:31:05PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 04:40, Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de wrote:
No. make_rename_temp should go away. Please.
I don't disagree, in principle (less code is
Hi,
when putting together a patch to fix PR 43812 I wanted to extend
the call graph verifier to verify that
1) the same_comdat_group linked lists are indeed circular,
2) there are no one element lists, and
3) all nodes in such lists have the flag DECL_COMDAT (node-decl) set.
However, the third
Hi,
I have not really payed much attention to this thread, but...
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:38:09AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 08:21:17AM +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
There is one header you can add to emails:
X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore
- this will tell patchwork to ignore the patch completely. I use this when
sending a this is the stuff I'm merging for the next release email, as all
of
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 11:38:39AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hi,
everything was fine until this morning, now upon make-check in the v3
dir, during the final link for testsuite_shared.so, ld spills:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 06:16:03PM -0700, michael.a wrote:
Any advice on compiling gcc? That is the chicken and egg problem. If I
install a binary version of GCC, then use it to build and install a custom
GCC (which I want to become the system wide GCC) ...then how is this
commonly done?
Hi,
The description of TREE_ADDRESSABLE macro in tree.h says:
In ..._TYPE nodes, it means that objects of this type must
be fully addressable. This means that pieces of this
object cannot go into register parameters, for example.
Yet the current tree-sra does not check this flag
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 06:49:58AM -0700, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
Thanks, I didn't notice both functions have different arguments after
transformation.
However, gprof produces T.251 in its statistics, completely unknown
to user. Could GCC use more informative name here, e.g.,
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 04:26:12PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 07/28/2009 10:44 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
I guess I'll poke at cleaning this up today. I've got to
familiarize myself with how virtual clones work...
The virtual clones that ipa-cp makes seems to be easy.
My
Hi,
the testsuite on the hppa machine (gcc61 on the compile farm) has
always hanged for me from time to time. However, lately (at least
since I returned from vacation last Monday) it hangs every time.
I have the compiler configured for c and c++ only, without bootstrap.
I run the testsuite
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 09:31:14AM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote:
Is gcc61 running HP-UX or Linux? I haven't seen any hangs in
my hppa HP-UX testing. I don't do any hppa Linux testing.
I guess I should have specified that. It indeed does run Linux.
Thanks,
Martin
verifying such decls don't leak to the IL
(and then try to use the mechanism above to keep the debug info).
Thanks,
Martin
2009-09-11 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
* function.c (gimplify_parameters): Do not set a value-expr on
callee-copied parm decls.
Index: small/gcc
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 06:39:10PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz writes:
I have run the testsuite on hppa with the following patch and I
successfully bootstrapped and tested it on x86_64. Unless someone
objects, I will bootstrap it on hppa and commit
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 07:20:47PM +0200, Feng LI wrote:
Hi,
Is there an interface provided in GCC to clone the current function?
I searched in the source code but failed, just in case I'm going wrong.
There are at least two. If you want to clone from within an ordinary
estimate_numbers_of_iterations, call
free_number_of_iterations_estimates before calling
remove_range_assertions.
* gcc.c-torture/execute/pr49419.c: New test.
r175109 | jamborm | 2011-06-16 15:37:37 -0400 (Thu, 16 Jun 2011) | 7 lines
2011-06-16 Martin Jambor
Hi,
On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 04:05:59PM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
E.g.
/home/toon/compilers/obj-t/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/toon/compilers/obj-t/./gcc/
-B/tmp/c/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/tmp/c/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem
/tmp/c/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include -isystem
Hi,
I have spent quite some time trying to build an x32 gcc to debug a PR
this week before I finally found the configure switch that made
everything work. In order to share this possibly valuable knowledge,
I have created a wiki mini-page detailing how I managed to get it
finally working:
cleaning by going down the list tracking
down what has been and what needs to be down and updating all the
wikis. Do you think this is something that is worthwhile to work on?
Yes, I think that would be very useful.
On 24 March 2015 at 12:16, Martin Jambor wrote:
Yes, I think that even
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 06:14:30PM -0500, David Kunsman wrote:
Hello, I was just reading through the current projects wiki page and I
noticed how out of date pretty much all of them are. So I was
planning on doing spring cleaning by going down the list tracking
down what has been and
Hi,
because I really dislike the hassle our (almost) flattened header
files cause quite often, I have made a very simple experiment to find
out how the header files really depend on each other. Some results,
together with a dozen of short paragraphs of relevant text are here:
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:59:51PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 19:28 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Sorry in advance for inviting a bikeshed discussion, but while making
the hashing changes that I just committed, I noticed that the C++ification
has been done in a
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 07:28:45PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Sorry in advance for inviting a bikeshed discussion
, but while making
the hashing changes that I just committed, I noticed that the C++ification
has been done in a variety of different styles. I ended up having to follow
Hi,
I've been asked to look into the item one of
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1990397 and found out
that at least shrink-wrapping happily moves prologue past an asm
statement which can be bad if the asm statement contains a call
instruction.
Am I right concluding that this is a
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 03:31:52PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 13:57 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
I hear that at Cauldron people were generally supportive of switching
over to git as the primary GCC repository, and talked about me being
involved in that
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:32:26PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 03:31:52PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
If we're going to migrate to git (I hope so), can we also please
*slightly* revise the policy on commit messages, to add meaningful
titles to commits?
Hello,
because Thomas Schwinge unfortunately cannot attend the Cauldron this
year, I have volunteered to take care of organizing an Accelerator BoF
at the event (at the moment conveniently scheduled for Sunday 10am).
This email is not only an invitation to participate but also a call
for agenda
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 01:44:15PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 07:53:49PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
I've been asked to look into the item one of
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1990397 and found out
that at least shrink-wrapping happily
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 02:25:34PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/07/2015 11:53 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
I've been asked to look into the item one of
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1990397 and found out
that at least shrink-wrapping happily moves prologue past an asm
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 05:40:58PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As I'm touching areas of GCC here, that I have no noteworthy experience
> with (IPA optimizations, cgraph), I'm asking for your help. Thanks!
>
> This is primarily to implement a better "avoid offloading" policy for
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:45:49AM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> What's the plan to split omp-low.c into multiple files? Right now,
> omp-low.c contains code to lower and expand OpenMP and OpenACC. At least
> for the OpenACC transforms, we made an effort to keep the changes in
> omp-low.c
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:31:48PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Suggestions how to test that IPA-SRA and IPA-PTA aren't happening?
> Anything else we need to cover?
>
I would use some test from gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-sra-*.c, add
the attribute and negate the scan-dump test.
Martin
Hello,
I am not sure if I can help you but...
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:05:07AM +0200, Andre Groenewald wrote:
> I am discovering the awesome world of GCC internals. I managed to
> develop a basic front end. It can call internal and external functions
> and link with standard libraries. All is
, is there an easy way to
> turn it into a METHOD_TYPE, like a single tree call.
> That will take care of consistency.
>
None that I know of, but there is build_method_type_directly that you
should be able ti use instead of build_function_type_array.
Martin
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 a
1 - 100 of 1987 matches
Mail list logo
