Ideally I'd like to see the source code for the scheduler but I don't
know where to find it. Can someone let me know where to get it,
please?
See http://gcc.gnu.org/svn.html. You can also look into the version
control system via a web interface, but that isn't well suited to
grep. ;-)
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Ben Elliston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was speaking to Andrew Tridgell yesterday about how he uses svn with
the Samba project. He mentioned an idea that we could pursue in the GCC
project.
As you know, Subversion keeps all branches and the trunk under
Hello all,
It is not necessary that a pattern with a single constrain will have
only one instruction in the template.
Say if the pattern A have two instructions in the template and pattern
B has one instruction in the template and the target has only two
delay slots will i be able to tell gcc
Hi,
Since yesterday I'm having seemingly random bootstrap comparisons failures on
i586-suse-linux: for caller-save.o yesterday, for build/gensupport.o today at
revision 133861. But a second tree at the same revision bootstrapped fine.
Is anyone else seeing this?
--
Eric Botcazou
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is not necessary that a pattern with a single constrain will have
only one instruction in the template.
Say if the pattern A have two instructions in the template and pattern
B has one instruction in the template and the target has only two
delay
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is not necessary that a pattern with a single constrain will have
only one instruction in the template.
Say if the pattern A have two instructions in the template and
Hi,
Intel has published Intel AVX spec:
http://softwareprojects.intel.com/avx/
I am checking in AVX binutils support. We will create an avx branch
soon.
H.J.
Eric Botcazou wrote:
Hi,
Since yesterday I'm having seemingly random bootstrap comparisons failures on
i586-suse-linux: for caller-save.o yesterday, for build/gensupport.o today at
revision 133861. But a second tree at the same revision bootstrapped fine.
Is anyone else seeing this?
Have
Hi,
Intel published Intel AVX spec:
http://softwareprojects.intel.com/avx/
It extended SSE registers to 256bit. I checked in the AVX binutils
support:
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2008-04/msg00045.html
For 32bit, I used numbers 53-60 for %ymm0-%ymm7. For 64bit, I used
numbers 70-85 for
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Say the target has two delay slots for call instructions.
So we can have something like this
(define_attr slottable no,yes,has_slot (const_string yes))
(define_delay
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Say the target has two delay slots for call instructions.
So we can have something like this
(define_attr slottable no,yes,has_slot (const_string yes))
(define_delay (eq_attr slottable has_slot)
[(eq_attr slottable yes) (nil) (nil)
(eq_attr
Am 03.04.2008 um 16:22 schrieb Mohamed Shafi:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now imagine that i have 3 patterns : Pattern A with two instructions
in its template, Pattern B and Pattern C with only one
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mohamed Shafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Say the target has two delay slots for call instructions.
So we can have something like this
(define_attr slottable no,yes,has_slot
This is the beta release of binutils 2.18.50.0.6 for Linux, which is
based on binutils 2008 0403 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various
changes. It is purely for Linux.
All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree.
You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 17:30 -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 05:16:23PM -0700, Xiaoxiang Liu wrote:
I have a question regarding GCC4 version compatibility? In general,
should two versions with same major version number be compatible?
Specifically, I want to confirm whether a
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20080403 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20080403/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
The Embedded-C spec introduces a number of C language features useful
for embedded development. GCC already implements fixed point arithmetic
(Chapter 4) from this proposal.
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1169.pdf
Chapter 5 is divided into two sections: named address space
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Ben Elliston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Our implementation only covers section 5.1 of the proposal (named
address space support). Section 5.2 has not been implemented.
Is C++ supported? I do know for that fixed point types, C++ is mostly
supported (except
Is C++ supported? I do know for that fixed point types, C++ is mostly
supported (except mangling and a couple others). I think we should not
be adding extension unless they are both supported in the C and C++
front-ends.
C++ is not supported because this proposal came from WG14 (which is not
--- Comment #7 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2008-04-03 06:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Revision 133787 breaks ia64
The patch is OK.
But won't all targets that have similar code need the same fix? If I cd
to the config dir, and try grep final_end_function */* it looks like
--- Comment #1 from wilson at tuliptree dot org 2008-04-03 06:26 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr11832.c
doesn't work for Linux/ia64
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
(set (pc)^M
(reg:DI 2 loc79)) 329 {indirect_jump} (nil))^M
This is a problem with the
--- Comment #2 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 06:27 ---
Created an attachment (id=15418)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15418action=view)
ia64.h patch to define REGNO_OK_FOR_INDIRECT_JUMP_P
Obvious definition of the REGNO_OK_FOR_INDIRECT_JUMP_P macro.
--- Comment #3 from wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 06:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=15419)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15419action=view)
rtl-factoring.c patch to allocate second reg for IA-64
This allocates a second register if
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 07:44 ---
Subject: Bug 35741
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 07:43:46 2008
New Revision: 133863
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133863
Log:
PR c++/35741
* semantics.c (finish_offsetof): Undo
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 07:51 ---
Subject: Bug 35741
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 07:51:01 2008
New Revision: 133864
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133864
Log:
PR c++/35741
* semantics.c (finish_offsetof): Undo
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 07:52 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from loki at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 08:24 ---
The patch from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg00824.html should
fix this kind of problem.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 33642 ***
--
loki at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #18 from loki at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 08:24 ---
*** Bug 35785 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
loki at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:00 ---
Same thing for me.
--
singler at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On the attached testcase (from wine) at -O -m32 or higher GCC ICEs, because
very deep recursion in tree-ssa-sccvn.c's DFS:
...
#49137 0x0078fe7c in DFS (name=0x2aaab0a8dde0) at
../../gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c:1898
#49138 0x0078fe7c in DFS (name=0x2f5d7840) at
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:53 ---
I suppose this is exactly PR35204.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 35204 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
The following is invalid Fortran 95 but valid Fortran 2003 as the variable is
reallocated:
integer, allocatable :: a(:)
allocate(a(1))
print *, size(a)
a = [1,2,3] ! Implicit reallocation.
! Wrong: a(:) = [1,2,3] ! Out of bounds 1 vs. 3
print *, size(a)
end
The Intel compiler already supports
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35811
--- Comment #24 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 10:02
---
It looks ugly as hell, but i have no problem with it because i'm not
sure you can do better without completely replacing the algorithm :)
as it seems only wine is affected (and there is the -fno-tree-fre
--- Comment #23 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:53
---
*** Bug 35811 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:04 ---
One thing to add: Seemingly gfortran supports reallocation for allocatable
components (by itself a F2003 feature) using the constructor (see example), but
not without constructor.
Additionally, while a simple
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 10:23 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg00177.html
for details.
I guess before moving further along with this, attributes for parameter packs
should be decided upon. Do we want to allow them at all? What
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 09:52 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 11:28 ---
Actually, to clarify #c10, attributes on parameter packs just make things
harder on the compiler side, but even in C++98 the same issue is present:
#define vector __attribute__((__vector_size__ (16)))
template
The code generated for switch (n 7) which has all possible cases (0-7)
includes a redundant range check.
To illustrate, this source code:
void foo(unsigned int *d, const unsigned int *s, unsigned int n)
{
switch (n 7) {
case 7:
d[7] = s[7];
break;
case 6:
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 12:50 ---
Subject: Bug 35795
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Apr 3 12:49:27 2008
New Revision: 133868
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133868
Log:
2008-04-03 Jan Hubicka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
code,
template int N, typename... P struct i { typedef i t; };
template typename I struct n;
template typename... E, int N struct niN, E... : iN+1, E... { };
template typename... E struct nisizeof...(E), E... : isizeof...(E),
E... { };
typedef i1, char t;
typedef nt::t x;
leads to
code:
#include typeinfo
#include cassert
namespace __cxxabi {
extern C char* __cxa_demangle(const char* mangled_name, char* buf,
size_t* n, int*status);
}
template typename...
struct p {};
int main()
{
int r;
assert(__cxxabi::__cxa_demangle(typeid(p).name(),0,0,r));
}
--
--- Comment #9 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 13:44 ---
I am pretty sure I saw this one targeting sparc-rtems. Building an updated
tree now to confirm it is the fix.
../../../../gcc/libstdc++-v3/src/iostream-inst.cc: In member function 'void
std::basic_iostreamchar,
--- Comment #35 from joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com 2008-04-03 14:30
---
Subject: Re: Branch to 0x0 from Ada run-time
laurent at guerby dot net wrote:
--- Comment #34 from laurent at guerby dot net 2008-04-03 03:47 ---
May be other platform aligned the record 8 byte
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
the static 2nd static assertion in x() fails. if the other partial
specialization of template d is used, the code works as expected. As you can
see the only difference between these d's is, that the T parameter is at a
different position which shouldn't make a difference to the outcome of typedef
time.
Core2Duo 2.16Ghz, i686-apple-darwin9, gcc version 4.4.0 20080403 (experimental)
(GCC)
+ patches (including the patch referenced in comment #16):
Polyhedron Benchmark Validator
Copyright (C) Polyhedron Software
--- Comment #7 from oblivian at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-03
15:07 ---
They re-closed the binutils bug as invalid again and told me to open a new one.
So here's the new one http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6027
We'll see if it gets any more traction.
--
--- Comment #20 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-04-03 15:22 ---
I have reverted the patch referenced in comment #16 and the 16 tests fail as
with gfortran 4.3.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33642
--- Comment #10 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2008-04-03 15:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Revision 133787 breaks ia64
I am pretty sure I saw this one targeting sparc-rtems. Building an updated
tree now to confirm it is the fix.
When compiling a combined gcc + g++ + binutils, the configure script for the
libstdc++ library is using the host g++ rather than the last stage g++ for
determining atomic builtin support status.
While I probably need to compile the toolchain with CXXFLAGS=-march=i486, from
what I've read, to
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 16:19 ---
Fixed in 4.4:
foo:
.LFB2:
andl$7, %edx
jmp *.L10(,%rdx,8)
...
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 16:19 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Revision 133787 breaks ia64
I am pretty sure I saw this one targeting sparc-rtems. Building an updated
tree now to confirm it is the fix.
--- Comment #12 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-03 16:21
---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Hi,
I get an ICE when compiling vector-2.c with -fira:
Executing on host: /home/mstein/sim/ira/arm-elf/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/mstein/sim/ira/arm-elf/build
/gcc/ -O0 -w -DSTACK_SIZE=16384 -fno-show-column -c-fira -o vector-2.o
/home/mstein/svn/ira/
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
extern int a[];
void
foo (void)
{
#pragma omp parallel
#pragma omp master
a[3] = 1;
#pragma omp parallel shared(a)
#pragma omp master
a[3] = 1;
}
ICEs, because is_variable_sized doesn't expect incomplete types.
--
Summary: ICE on incomplete array in shared clause
--- Comment #21 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 17:04 ---
Dominique, in answer to your question in comment #19, without the patch any
code for powerpc*-linux gets an ICE as reported originally. The very long
compilation times are a concern, but wrong code in four CPU2000
--- Comment #1 from oblivian at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-03
17:34 ---
After looking back at my 4.2.3 build logs. The above is somewhat incorrect.
In 4.2.3, the pass 2 toolchain build of libstdc++ correctly checked the target
g++ rather than the host and reported that it
--
Summary: internal compiler error with forall
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy:
The following program causes an internal compiler error.
Each of the three subroutines causes an ICE. The ICE moves
around or goes away when I try to simplify the test much
more.
! fails on Windows XP
! gcc version 4.4.0 20080312 (experimental) [trunk revision 133139]
Dick Hendrickson
--- Comment #1 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-04-03 18:37
---
Obviously, ignore this one. I must have hit enter
by mistake
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35819
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #68 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 19:52
---
I am no longer working on specifically this.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-04-03 20:30 ---
The code compiles fine on (powerpc|i686)-apple-darwin9. Would it be possible to
check how the executable works?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35820
--- Comment #2 from oblivian at users dot sourceforge dot net 2008-04-03
20:45 ---
Ok so the gcc/g++ i build has optimization on by default. The configuration
scripts don't seem to take this into account and the call to CXX for the atomic
check is optimizing away the check in the
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:03 ---
Subject: Bug 35818
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:02:44 2008
New Revision: 133875
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133875
Log:
PR middle-end/35818
* omp-low.c
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:04 ---
Subject: Bug 35738
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:03:54 2008
New Revision: 133876
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133876
Log:
PR c/35738
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_atomic):
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:21 ---
Subject: Bug 35786
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:20:53 2008
New Revision: 133877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133877
Log:
PR fortran/35786
* openmp.c (resolve_omp_clauses):
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:23 ---
Subject: Bug 35818
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:22:41 2008
New Revision: 133878
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133878
Log:
PR middle-end/35818
* omp-low.c
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:25 ---
Subject: Bug 35738
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:24:28 2008
New Revision: 133879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133879
Log:
PR c/35738
* c-parser.c (c_parser_omp_atomic):
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:25 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:25 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:26 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 21:02 ---
Subject: Bug 35786
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Apr 3 21:01:26 2008
New Revision: 133874
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133874
Log:
PR fortran/35786
* openmp.c (resolve_omp_clauses):
--- Comment #2 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-04-03 22:12
---
Subject: Re: internal compiler error with forall
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 3:30 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-04-03
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 22:20 ---
Close then as INVALID. Actual bug report is PR 35820
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 22:27 ---
Confirm. While I do not get any crash like Dominique, valgrind shows that that
there is a problem:
==20532== Invalid write of size 8
==20532==at 0x463933: resolve_code (resolve.c:5902)
==20532==by 0x4661DB:
--
eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-03 23:50 ---
Subject: Bug 35712
Author: janis
Date: Thu Apr 3 23:49:35 2008
New Revision: 133881
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133881
Log:
2008-04-03 Janis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gcc/
PR
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 00:21 ---
Subject: Bug 35713
Author: janis
Date: Fri Apr 4 00:20:48 2008
New Revision: 133887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133887
Log:
PR target/35713
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c
--- Comment #1 from vmakarov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 02:05
---
Subject: Bug 35817
Author: vmakarov
Date: Fri Apr 4 02:04:25 2008
New Revision: 133888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=133888
Log:
2008-04-03 Vladimir Makarov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #1 from pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-04 05:30 ---
Fixed in r125309
--
pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35818
86 matches
Mail list logo
