Re: adding -Wshadow-local and -Wshadow-compatible-local ?

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: > > Hi Diego, > > I noticed this patch that adds support for improved -Wshadow-related options: > > [google] Add two new -Wshadow warnings (issue4452058) >https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg02317.html >

Re: [PATCH][PING^2] Skip preprocessor directives in mklog

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote: I'm not a good choice to be the maintainer of a perl script. I'm all kinds of sorry about the original choice of scripting language. I'd just spend a couple of hours re-writing it in python.

Re: [PATCH][PING^2] Skip preprocessor directives in mklog

The patch looks fine to me. I'm not really involved in GCC development anymore. I would suggest that this script should be maintained by whoever's been hacking on it the most. It's a simple script, so it shouldn't be hard to find a new maintainer for it. Diegop. On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:19

Re: [PATCH] mklog: Fallback to env author name and addr

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer rep.dot@gmail.com wrote: contrib/ChangeLog: 2015-04-08 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer al...@gcc.gnu.org * mklog ($name, $addr): Fallback to env author settings. This looks fine, but note that I no longer have approval rights

Re: Stepping down as global maintainer

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Gerald Pfeifer ger...@pfeifer.com wrote: On Friday 2015-02-06 16:42, Diego Novillo wrote: As such, I propose to become a write-after-approval maintainer and relinquish all the other maintainer roles I had. Thanks for your contributions over the years, Diego

Re: [PATCH] Added PLUGIN_FINISH_TYPE callback on enum type processing

That's On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Bruno Loff bruno.l...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, first contribution ever :) Here is the entry: 2014-10-19 Bruno Loff bruno.l...@gmail.com * c-parser.c (c_parser_declspecs): Call invoke_plugin_callbacks after processing enum declaration. This is fine.

Re: [PATCH] Added PLUGIN_FINISH_TYPE callback on enum type processing

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Bruno Loff bruno.l...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-19 Bruno Loff bruno.l...@gmail.com * c-parser.c (c_parser_declspecs): Call invoke_plugin_callbacks after processing enum declaration. Thanks. Committed at r220358. Diego.

Re: [PATCH] Added PLUGIN_FINISH_TYPE callback on enum type processing

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Bruno Loff bruno.l...@gmail.com wrote: The issue was first reported by Joachim Wieland to the list g...@gcc.gnu.org, on Wed, Jan 19, 2011 (Subject: PLUGIN_FINISH_TYPE not executed for enums). A description of the problem/bug and how my patch addresses it.

Re: [PATCH] Added PLUGIN_FINISH_TYPE callback on enum type processing

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Bruno Loff bruno.l...@gmail.com wrote: Something like: The PLUGIN_FINISH_TYPE callback for gcc plugins is now triggered for enum declarations. ? ChangeLog entries in GCC are pretty pick as to how they want to be formatted. See other entries for reference and

Re: [PATCH 1/2] teach mklog to get name / email from git config when available

On 20/11/2014, 16:51 , Tom de Vries wrote: OK for trunk? This is fine. Thanks. Diego.

Re: [RFC] First steps towards segregating types.

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: 1 - introduce a TYPE_REF tree node, which is effectively just a 'typed' tree node, and the TREE_TYPE() field of a TYPE_REF node would point to the type node. Any routines which utilize a TYPE node in a tree list would

Re: [PATCH] Fix for mklog

On 11/11/14 09:46, Marat Zakirov wrote: Attached patch make mklog to stop search for changes inside function once '}' occur. Ok, to commit? OK. Thanks. Diego.

Re: [PATCH] Fix for mklog

On 11/06/14 03:00, Marat Zakirov wrote: Ok to commit? OK. Thanks. Diego.

Re: [PATCH]Add aarch64 to list of targets that support gold

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Jing Yu jin...@google.com wrote: 2014-09-18 Jing Yu jin...@google.com * configure.ac: Add aarch64 to list of targets that support gold. * configure: Regenerate. OK. Thanks. Diego.

Re: [PATCH v2] Fix signed integer overflow in gcc/data-streamer.c

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf mar...@trippelsdorf.de wrote: On 2014.09.28 at 14:57 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: On 2014.09.28 at 14:36 +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: Can you use HOST_WIDE_INT_1U for this? Sure. Thanks for the suggestion. (Fix now resembles

Re: [PATCH][PING] Keep patch file permissions in mklog

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote: So it's a question of predictability (always do the same or do nothing) vs. robustness (do as much as you can given the circumstances). I'm not sure which one is better in this case. I think it's fine the way it is

Re: [PATCH][PING] Keep patch file permissions in mklog

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com wrote: On 08/04/2014 12:14 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 04-08-14 08:45, Yury Gribov wrote: Thanks! My 2 (actually 4) cents below. Hi Yuri, thanks for the review. +if ($#ARGV == 1 ($ARGV[0] eq -i || $ARGV[0] eq

Re: [PATCH] Fix mklog to support running from arbitrary folder

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com wrote: Hi all, Current mklog works only if run from GCC top-level folder. The patch allows running from arbitrary directory. I've used Linux directory separators which is probably ok because script already expects Linux

Re: [PATCH, docs] Document -z option

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com wrote: Just to document that it's passed directly on to the linker. OK? Wording changes? -eric 2014-07-15 Eric Christopher echri...@gmail.com * doc/invoke.texi (Link Options): Document -z option. Index:

Re: [PATCH] Improve -fdump-tree-all efficiency

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: * c-family/c-common.h (get_dump_info): Declare. * c-family/c-gimplify.c (c_genericize): Use saved dump files. * c-family/c-opts.c (c_common_parse_file): Begin and end dumps once around

Re: [PATCH 1/2] teach mklog to get name / email from git config when available

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:11 PM, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: 2014-04-28 Trevor Saunders tbsau...@mozilla.com * mklog: if in a git checkout try to get name and email from git. --- contrib/mklog | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/contrib/mklog

Re: [PATCH 2/2] allow running mklog as a filter

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: +# In any case if we got the diff on stdin then write the ChangeLog to stdout. Hm, this is breaks semantics: you only dump CL instead of CL+diff just because diff comes from stdin. Perhaps we could append contents

Re: Ping^3 GCC trunk 4.9: documentation patch on plugins

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote: On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 11:15 +0100, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: I am pinging again this documentation patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg00074.html (pinged at

Re: Ping^3 GCC trunk 4.9: documentation patch on plugins

OK with: +Pragmas registered with @code{c_register_pragma_with_expansion} or +@code{c_register_pragma_with_expansion_and_data} are supporting +preprocessor expansions. For an example of using such a pragma: s/are supporting/support/ s/For an example of using such a pragma/For example/ Diego.

Re: Is testing libgomp outside of the build tree supported?

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote: could somebody please shed some light on how this is done? It's nice that everybody has this kind of testing, but the only bit in the gcc sources itself seems to be a bit bit-rot and incomplete (contrib/test_installed).

Re: [patch] Add missing generated file to contrib/gcc_update list.

On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Brooks Moses bmo...@google.com wrote: The gcc_update file is missing an entry for gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md; this patch adds it. Ok for trunk? OK. Diego.

Re: Is testing libgomp outside of the build tree supported?

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote: If the presence of the build tree makes writing some tests significantly simpler, I think that is OK. I would like to discourage that. Testing an already installed GCC for which no build tree exists is a very useful

Re: [PATCH] Fix handling of context diff patches in mklog

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com wrote: Ok to commit? OK. Thanks. Diego.

Re: [PING][PATCH]Improving mklog [was: Re: RFC Asan instrumentation control]

Apologies for the delay. The patch is OK. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Tatiana Udalova t.udal...@samsung.com wrote: Ping! Thank you, Tatiana Udalova -- Hello, I have reproduced the problem with mklog mentioned by Jakub: In my experience mklog is pretty much useless, e.g.

Re: [patch] fix doc header in contrib/mklog

The patch is OK. It qualifies as obvious, too. Thanks. On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote: The mklog script claims to write to stdout, but it actually modifies the input file in-place. OK to commit this change, which also updates the copyright dates?

Re: Improving mklog [was: Re: RFC Asan instrumentation control]

On 20/12/2013, 07:08 , Yury Gribov wrote: Ultimately, mklog ought to write the ChangeLog itself. We get rid of that headache, at least. How about this then? Updated mklog now adds 'New file'/'New test'/'Remove' when necessary. I did some tests with unified/context-diffed SVN and git and it

Re: Improving mklog [was: Re: RFC Asan instrumentation control]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com wrote: On 12/19/2013 04:17 PM, Yury Gribov wrote: In my experience mklog is pretty much useless, e.g. if you add a new function, it will list the previous function as being modified rather than the new one, etc. In my

Re: Improving mklog [was: Re: RFC Asan instrumentation control]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Yury Gribov y.gri...@samsung.com wrote: Frankly in my experience Perl with `use warnings' and `use strict' isn't that bad. We could just as well massage existing script. I suppose. Got it. Attached new version of script and ChangeLog entry. Will submit

Re: [wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Gerald Pfeifer ger...@pfeifer.com wrote: On Thu, 28 Nov 2013, Richard Biener wrote: Why remove ChangeLog files, web pages and comments? I was going to complain about web pages being removed. :-) On Thu, 28 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: -pFixes for obvious

Re: [wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: Here's feedback. Install it now :-) Works for me :) Committed. Diego.

[wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

[ sent first version in html. apologies for the dup. ] Based on the recent discussion on the obvious fix policy. OK to commit? Index: htdocs/svnwrite.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/svnwrite.html,v retrieving revision

Re: [wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

New version with a slightly cleaned up wording: Index: htdocs/svnwrite.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/svnwrite.html,v retrieving revision 1.29 diff -u -d -u -p -r1.29 svnwrite.html --- htdocs/svnwrite.html24 Sep

Re: [wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

Fixed quotation as per IRC feedback. Index: htdocs/svnwrite.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/svnwrite.html,v retrieving revision 1.29 diff -u -d -u -p -r1.29 svnwrite.html --- htdocs/svnwrite.html24 Sep 2013

Re: [wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote: Why remove ChangeLog files, web pages and comments? Either enumerate everything or just enumerate nothing and simply say Obvious fixes can be committed without prior approval. Thanks, that's much better. I was

Re: [wwwdocs] Update obvious fix commit policy

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote: I think it might be worth saying that one class of 'obvious' fix that we don't want to go in without prior clearance are bulk white space clean-ups. These can be a right-royal pain to deal with if you're in the middle

Re: gcc's obvious patch policy

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Alan Modra amo...@gmail.com wrote: Was Re: [buildrobot] [PATCH] mips: Really remove ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:08:45AM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote: This patch is obvious and it fixes breakage. Please go ahead and commit it. Sorry to pick on

Re: gcc's obvious patch policy

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Eric Botcazou [mailto:ebotca...@adacore.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 12:33 PM To: Iyer, Balaji V Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Diego Novillo; Jeff Law; Steven Bosscher

Re: [GOOGLE] Refactor the profile propagation for AutoFDO

Thanks, Deaho. One other thing that I've found on the LLVM implementation (that I'm not sure happens in GCC): self-referential edges. If a loop consists of a single-basic block, the back edge will point to itself. I haven't been able to reproduce it with regular control flow constructs in GCC.

Re: [GOOGLE] Refactor the profile propagation for AutoFDO

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: In this case the backedge will be a critical edge, which will be split by GCC. Right. So, if I split it, I will reach essentially the same conclusion, I think. The new block will get the original block's weight, which

Re: [GOOGLE] Refactor the profile propagation for AutoFDO

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: In this case the backedge will be a critical edge, which will be split

Re: [patch 1/3] Flatten gimple.h

On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/21/2013 02:26 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/21/13 11:15, Andrew MacLeod wrote: Is there anything in particular one needs to do for plugins? I thought I saw a patch somewhere that changed something in the Makefile,

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (1/2)

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote: Thanks. Committed as rev 205023. Nice work, but why did you antedate the entries in the various ChangeLog Oh, that's because of local commits and holding on to the patch for a few days. That date is the date of the

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (1/2)

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 8:32 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59212 Thanks. Fixed. PR 59212 * g++.dg/plugin/selfassign.c: Include stringpool.h diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/plugin/selfassign.c

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (1/2)

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 08:43:57AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote: Thanks. Committed as rev 205023. Nice work, but why did you antedate

Re: [patch] Privatize gimplify_ctx structure.

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: Do our coding standards allow using default arguments: extern void push_gimplify_context (bool in_ssa = false, bool rhs_cond_ok = false); Yes, as long as they are not expensive to construct

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (1/2)

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: It looks OK to me. Thanks. Committed as rev 205023. Ian, the Go front end will need that patch committed now. Diego.

Re: [patch] fix graphite build

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: graphite-sese-to-poly.c needs expr.h to compile. Fixed thusly and checked in as revision 205027. Thanks! Diego.

Re: Please don't commit changes to gcc/go/gofrontend

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote: Hi, as noted in gcc/go/README.gcc, the files in gcc/go/gofrontend are actually mirrored from a different repository. Please do not directly commit changes to those files. Instead, send the changes to me. I will commit

Re: patch PLUGIN_HEADER_FILE event for tracing of header inclusions.

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote: On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: Thanks for your attention. I am attaching a slightly improved patch against trunk svn rev. 305009 (the improvements are removing the spurious diff hunk, and better

Re: [PATCH] C++-ify and simplify loop iterators

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote: OMG, finally a c++ification that _shrinks_ client code instead of bloating it. Not quite. The patch that converted VEC macros removed a non-trivial amount of client code. $ git log -p -n1

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (1/2)

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/14/13 15:19, Diego Novillo wrote: A good chunk. I'm doing these FIXMEs in the next sequence of patches, so we won't have them for long. Again, I was going for an orderly transition here. However, I'm much more concerned

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (2/2)

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/14/2013 05:16 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: This patch contains the mechanical side-effects from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01663.html There are rather

Re: [patch 3/4] Separate gimple.[ch] and gimplify.[ch] - front end files

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote: Put another way: what do you envision that gimple expressions would be. For example what would you propose we could do with them? The only expressions I have in mind are memory references and aggregates, which can get pretty

Re: [patch 3/4] Separate gimple.[ch] and gimplify.[ch] - front end files

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/14/2013 10:26 AM, Michael Matz wrote: Hi, On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Andrew MacLeod wrote: There needs to be a place which has gimple componentry that is not related to or require a statement. gimple.h is becoming

Re: [patch 3/4] Separate gimple.[ch] and gimplify.[ch] - front end files

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: very possibly, i just haven't gotten to those parts yet. I can change the name back to gimple-decl.[ch] or some such thing if you like that better. As much as I hate to paint name sheds: gimple-val.[ch]. Diego.

Add a new header to PLUGIN_HEADERS

I did not add all headers factored out of tree.h because it is unclear (and impossible to tell) what plugins need. This adds the one header used by the plugins in the testsuite. This will be changing quite dramatically as we progress with the header refactoring. 2013-11-14 Diego Novillo

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (1/2)

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/14/13 13:28, Diego Novillo wrote: Functions in each corresponding .c file got moved to those headers and others that already existed. I wanted to make this patch as mechanical as possible, so I made no attempt to fix

Re: Factor unrelated declarations out of tree.h (2/2)

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote: On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: This patch contains the mechanical side-effects from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01663.html There are rather a lot of Include tm.h changes here

Re: patch ping: diagnostics finalization and plugins

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote: 2013-11-11 Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net * toplev.c (toplev_main): Move PLUGIN_FINISH invocation before diagnostic_finish. OK. Diego.

Re: [buildrobot] [PATCH] pdp11-aout broken

On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de wrote: /home/jbglaw/repos/gcc/gcc/cfgexpand.c: In function ‘void expand_main_function()’: /home/jbglaw/repos/gcc/gcc/cfgexpand.c:5409:40: error: ‘NAME__MAIN’ was not declared in this scope Apologies for the breakage. I

Re: [patch] Create gimple-expr..[ch] ... was Re: RFC: gimple.[ch] break apart

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/07/2013 05:36 AM, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 11:26:46AM -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote: I decided to name the new file gimple-expr.[ch] instead of gimple-decl This will eventually

Re: [patch] remove superfluous sets to SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Aldy Hernandez al...@redhat.com wrote: SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT is set by default in gimple_build_assign(), by virtue of gimple_assign_set_lhs: static inline void gimple_assign_set_lhs (gimple gs, tree lhs) { GIMPLE_CHECK (gs, GIMPLE_ASSIGN); gimple_set_op (gs,

Re: Re-factor tree.h - Part 1

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote: On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: This is the first patch in a series of patches to cleanup tree.h to reduce the exposure it has all over the compiler. In this patch, I'm moving functions that are used once

Re: Re-factor tree.h - Part 1

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: On 11/06/13 00:04, Marc Glisse wrote: On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Diego Novillo wrote: This is the first patch in a series of patches to cleanup tree.h to reduce the exposure it has all over the compiler. In this patch, I'm moving

Re: [PATCH] Support multiline GTY markers in Doxygen filter; add unittests

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 4:06 PM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote: It's possible to run GCC's sources through Doxygen by setting INPUT_FILTER = contrib/filter_gcc_for_doxygen within contrib/gcc.doxy and invoking doxygen on the latter file. The script filters out

Re: [PATCH] use stack vectors more

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:48 PM, tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: From: Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com Hi, This patch is pretty dull, it just replaces a bunch of things of the form vecT x; x.create (N); // N is a constant blah blah x.release (); by stack_vecT, N x; blah blah Of

Re: [PATCH] use stack vectors more

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: The patch is OK, but it did not completely apply in my tree. Mind sending an updated version (or point me at a git repo I can pull it from). interesting, I just pulled and rebased it onto r204296 without any manual

Re: [PATCH] use stack vectors more

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: It must've been whitespace then. Your new patch applied just fine. I'll be committing shortly. Committed at r204301. Diego.

Re: [PATCH] rewrite stack vectors

On 2013-10-10 14:07 , tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote: This makes the implementation of stack vectors simpler and easier to use. This works by making

Re: [patch] Flatten tree-ssa-loops.h

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: Similar to tree-ssa.h, tree-ssa-loops.h became an aggregator for 3 of the tree-ssa-loop* header files. This remedies that situation. The average .c file required only 1 of the 3 includes from tree-ssa-loop.h.

Re: [PATCH][buildrobot] tilepro/tilegx: fallout after tree.h refactoring (was: Re-factor inclusion of tree.h)

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:22 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de wrote: On Mon, 2013-10-21 15:36:49 -0400, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: Can anyone think of some way that we can use to automatically block inclusions of tree.h from header files? Code review is the only way

Re-factor inclusion of tree.h

. (ix86_expand_setmem): Call ix86_expand_set_or_movmem. +2013-10-21 Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com + + * asan.c: Include tree.h + * bb-reorder.c: Likewise. + * cfgcleanup.c: Likewise. + * cfgloopmanip.c: Likewise. + * data-streamer-in.c: Likewise

Re: Re-factor inclusion of tree.h

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote: On 10/21/13 10:52, Diego Novillo wrote: I plan to commit this by tomorrow, unless there are objections. I can't think of a good reason to even bother waiting :-) Heh, OK, thanks. After analyzing all the build failures

Re: [PATCH][i386]Fix PR 57756

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:06 PM, David Edelsohn dje@gmail.com wrote: How is Google going to change its patch commit policies to ensure that this does not happen again? There is nothing to change. Google follows http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html, like everyone else. Sri just fixed the

Re: [patch] The remainder of tree-flow.h refactored.

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: bootstraps on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, regressions test are still running. OK? Sure.

Re: Ping^6: contribute Synopsys Designware ARC port

On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com wrote: The main part of the port (everything but the testsuite) is still waiting for review: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00323.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00324.html

Re: Ping^6: contribute Synopsys Designware ARC port

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com wrote: Yes. Claudiu Zissulescu at Synopsys would in principle be available as co-maintainer, but I suppose it is customary to apply for write-after- approval status first. I'm not sure. A question for the SC. SC

Re: Ping^6: contribute Synopsys Designware ARC port

On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com wrote: The main part of the port (everything but the testsuite) is still waiting for review: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00323.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00324.html

Re: GTY on simple struct (Was: Re: Ping^6: contribute Synopsys Designware ARC port)

On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com wrote: Quoting Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com: No need to mark struct arc_frame_info with GTY. It contains no pointers. That's not quite how it works. machine_function needs GTY. It uses arc_frame_info, hence

Remove enum ssa_mode

The gimple builder no longer support normal form. The ssa_mode enum is not needed now. Committed to trunk. * gimple.h (enum ssa_mode): Remove. --- gcc/gimple.h | 9 - 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/gimple.h b/gcc/gimple.h index 3047ab4..a031c8d 100644 ---

Re: [google, patch] Google-local version of fix for PR58312, libssp cross-compiling

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Brooks Moses bmo...@google.com wrote: Thus, this Google-local patch addresses our immediate need in a simple way. Ok to commit to google/main and merge to google/gcc-4_8? OK. This should go in google/integration, actually. google/main can get it later when

Re: gimple build interface

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: I see the benefit in the streamlined asan.c code, but I detest that ssa_mode flag. And as long as it supports SSA, I don't think it should be in gimple.c. Yeah, at the time that I introduced it, I had a hard time

Re: gimple build interface

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 4:08 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/19/2013 09:24 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: I think this is of most use to ssa passes that need to construct code snippets, so I

Re: Ping^2: small patch to accept = inside GCC plugin arguments

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:23 AM, Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net wrote: Hello All, I'm pinging again my small patch to accept = inside plugin arguments http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg00382.html OK. Diego.

Re: Ping patch to enable *.cc files in gengtype

On 2013-09-16 04:19 , Basile Starynkevitch wrote: Hello all, I'm pinging the patch (of september 2nd) on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00036.html gcc/ChangeLog entry 2013-09-16 Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net * gengtype.c (file_rules): Added rule

Re: RFC - Refactor tree.h

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: E.g. today I've noticed you've lost OMP_CLAUSE_LINEAR_NO_COPYIN comment that has been added to tree.h recently, but you haven't actually moved

Re: RFC - Refactor tree.h

On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: E.g. today I've noticed you've lost OMP_CLAUSE_LINEAR_NO_COPYIN comment that has been added to tree.h recently, but you haven't actually moved it into tree-core.h. Sorry about that. I remember an update conflict, but I

Re: [PATCH, libvtv] Fix most of the testsuite.

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Caroline Tice cmt...@google.com wrote: Ping? Could somebody please review this for me? Mike already approved this upthread.

Re: [PATCH, vtv update] Add documentation for --enable-vtable-verify configure option...

On 2013-08-28 17:15 , Caroline Tice wrote: # Least ordering for dependencies mean linking w/o libstdc++ for as # long as the development of libvtv does not absolutely require it. Index: gcc/doc/install.texi === ---

Re: RFC - Next refactoring steps

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote: On Sep 5, 2013, at 11:54 PM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote: Most of the GCC headerfiles do not include all their required headers but rely on .c files doing that (in the appropriate order). I somehow

Factor gimple structures out of gimple.h

on rationale at the thread: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00300.html Tested on x86_64. 2013-09-06 Diego Novillo dnovi...@google.com * Makefile.in (GIMPLE_CORE_H): New. (GIMPLE_H): Depend on GIMPLE_CORE_H. (TREE_SSA_ALIAS_H): New. Replace references to tree-ssa

Re: [PATCH 6/6] Add manual GTY hooks

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-31 at 19:27 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote: On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 10:09 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Steven Bosscher

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Convert gimple to a C++ class hierarchy

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote: What do you do during stage1? Have a collector that never collects? Yes. That was the pebble in the shoe. The cc1plus built for the purposes of gengtype does not need to look at a lot of code, so turning off

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Convert gimple to a C++ class hierarchy

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote: Hi, On Fri, 30 Aug 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: I thought the principle that was acquired was that gengtype shouldn't be improved to support

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Convert gimple to a C++ class hierarchy

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote: Teaching the gengtype parser about {struct,class} name : public {struct,class} someothername { ... } as opposed to current {struct,class} name { ... } shouldn't be that hard. And, if the complaint is that we'd need to

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >