Re: [PATCH] calls: Introduce cxx17_empty_base_field_p [PR94383]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:45:19AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Given what was said on irc about DECL_NAME not necessarily being > > significant for DECL_ARTIFICIAL decls, would it be better to drop > > this part of the check? > > My preference

[PATCH][RFC] extend DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P to all types

This extends DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P to all types so we can clear TREE_ADDRESSABLE even for integers with partial defs, not just complex and vector variables. To make that transition easier the patch inverts DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P to DECL_NOT_GIMPLE_REG_P since that makes the default the current state for

Re: [PATCH] calls: Introduce cxx17_empty_base_field_p [PR94383]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:45:19AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Given what was said on irc about DECL_NAME not necessarily being > significant for DECL_ARTIFICIAL decls, would it be better to drop > this part of the check? My preference was have it as narrow as possible for the time being,

Re: [PATCH] calls: Introduce cxx17_empty_base_field_p [PR94383]

Jakub Jelinek writes: > Hi! > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:58:52PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> >if (TREE_CODE (field) != FIELD_DECL) >> > continue; >> > >> > - sub_count = aapcs_vfp_sub_candidate (TREE_TYPE (field), modep); >> > + /* Ignore C++17 empty base

[PATCH] S/390: Fix several test cases

Hi, The attached patch fixes several test cases. Successfully bootstrapped and regtested on S/390. Ok for master? Cheers, Stefan gcc/ChangeLog: 2020-04-21 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus * config/s390/s390.md ("*_ior_and_sr_ze"): lift from SI mode to DSI

Re: [PATCH PR94678] aarch64: unexpected result with -mgeneral-regs-only and sve

Mostly LGTM, just a couple of minor points: "Yangfei (Felix)" writes: > diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog > index 6e226cc..e956b69 100644 > --- a/gcc/ChangeLog > +++ b/gcc/ChangeLog > @@ -1,3 +1,23 @@ > +2020-04-22 Felix Yang > + > + PR target/94678 > + *

RE: [PATCH 0/19][GCC-8] aarch64: Backport outline atomics

Hi Andre, > -Original Message- > From: Andre Vieira (lists) > Sent: 22 April 2020 09:26 > To: Kyrylo Tkachov ; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Richard Sandiford ; s...@amazon.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/19][GCC-8] aarch64: Backport outline atomics > > > On 20/04/2020 09:42, Kyrylo

Re: [RFC] split pseudos during loop unrolling in RTL unroller

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:26 AM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes: > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:38 PM Segher Boessenkool > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi! > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 09:56:34AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > >> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:51 PM

Re: [PATCH] forwprop: Fix ICE when building an identity constructor [PR94700]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 10:31 AM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > This is really PR94683 part 2, handling the case in which the vector is > an identity and so doesn't need a VEC_PERM_EXPR. I should have realised > at the time that the other arm of the "if" would need the same fix. > > Tested on

Re: [PATCH] calls: Introduce cxx17_empty_base_field_p [PR94383]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:58:52PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > > if (TREE_CODE (field) != FIELD_DECL) > > > continue; > > > > > > - sub_count = aapcs_vfp_sub_candidate (TREE_TYPE (field), modep); > > > + /*

[PATCH] calls: Introduce cxx17_empty_base_field_p [PR94383]

Hi! On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:58:52PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > if (TREE_CODE (field) != FIELD_DECL) > > continue; > > > > - sub_count = aapcs_vfp_sub_candidate (TREE_TYPE (field), modep); > > + /* Ignore C++17 empty base fields, while their type

[committed] coroutines, testsuite: Tidy some test names (NFC).

Hi Try to make sure that we have consistent and useful naming for the tests before they get into the wild. tested on x86_64-darwin16, applied to master thanks Iain gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2020-04-22 Iain Sandoe * g++.dg/coroutines/torture/local-var-0.C: Rename to... *

Re: [RFC] split pseudos during loop unrolling in RTL unroller

Richard Biener via Gcc-patches writes: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:38 PM Segher Boessenkool > wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 09:56:34AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:51 PM Segher Boessenkool >> > wrote: >> > > > Yeah well, but RTL is not in SSA

RE: [PATCH PR94678] aarch64: unexpected result with -mgeneral-regs-only and sve

> -Original Message- > From: Richard Sandiford [mailto:richard.sandif...@arm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 6:11 PM > To: Yangfei (Felix) > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH PR94678] aarch64: unexpected result with -mgeneral- > regs-only and sve > > Should

Re: [PATCH v2] aarch64: Add TX3 machine model

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 5:38 AM Joel Jones via Gcc-patches wrote: > > I just joined the gcc-patches list, so I hope the mail software can parse > this out with an "In-Reply-To" header. > > I work for Marvell, and Anton's work is approved for submittal. I wrote the > first version of the .md

[PATCH] forwprop: Fix ICE when building an identity constructor [PR94700]

This is really PR94683 part 2, handling the case in which the vector is an identity and so doesn't need a VEC_PERM_EXPR. I should have realised at the time that the other arm of the "if" would need the same fix. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, aarch64_be-elf and x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?

Re: [PATCH 0/19][GCC-8] aarch64: Backport outline atomics

On 20/04/2020 09:42, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote: Hi Andre, -Original Message- From: Andre Vieira (lists) Sent: 16 April 2020 13:24 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov ; Richard Sandiford ; s...@amazon.com Subject: [PATCH 0/19][GCC-8] aarch64: Backport outline atomics Hi, This

Re: introduce target tmpnam and require it in tests relying on it

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 16:59, Martin Sebor wrote: > >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/543672.html > >> > >> I'm okay with the changes to the tests. > >> > >> The target-supports.exp changes look reasonable to me as well but > >> I can't approve them. Since you said it's

[committed] MAINTAINERS: add myself for write after approval

ChangeLog: 2020-04-22 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus * MAINTAINERS (Write After Approval): add myself --- MAINTAINERS | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index f37e9e68622..336346a37a5 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -582,6 +582,7

Re: [PATCH] aarch64：Add an error message in large code model for ilp32 [PR94577]

Hi, After this patch, a few tests are failing when running the testsuite with -mabi=ilp32: gcc.target/aarch64/pr63304_1.c (test for excess errors) gcc.target/aarch64/pr63304_1.c scan-assembler-times adrp 6 gcc.target/aarch64/pr70120-2.c (test for excess errors)

[PATCH] c++: Fix misuse of "override" in -Weffc++ warnings (PR 94698)

These warnings have nothing to do with virtual functions, so "override" is inappropriate. The warnings are just talking about defining special members, so let's say that. PR translation/94698 * class.c (check_field_decls): Change "override" to "define" in -Weffc++

[committed] libstdc++: Improve tests for __cpp_lib_erase_if macro

* testsuite/21_strings/basic_string/erasure.cc: Check for updated value of __cpp_lib_erase_if. * testsuite/23_containers/deque/erasure.cc: Likewise. * testsuite/23_containers/forward_list/erasure.cc: Likewise. * testsuite/23_containers/list/erasure.cc:

[pushed] c++: generic lambda forwarding function [PR94546]

While instantiating test(Plot) we partially instantiate the generic lambda. We look at forward(rest)... and see that it's just replacing parameter packs with new parameter packs and tries to do a direct substitution. But because register_parameter_specializations had built up a

<    1   2