[PATCH 4/4] New callgraph wrapper function creation added

2014-05-29 Thread Martin Liška
Hello, cgraph_make_wrapper is a new function that creates a simple wrapper of a function. The function will be used further in identical code folding if a pass proves that two functions are semantically equivalent. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk? Thanks, Martin 2014-

[PATCH 3/4] New attribute lookup function addition

2014-05-29 Thread Martin Liška
Hi, this patch introduces a new function lookup_attribute_starting that can find all attributes starting with a specified string. Purpose of the function is to be able to identify e.g. if a function has any 'omp' attribute. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk? Thanks, Mart

[PATCH 2/4] Enhancement of call graph API

2014-05-29 Thread Martin Liška
Hello, this patch enhances callgraph API to enable more precise control of expand_thunk; another function becomes global. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk? Thanks, Martin 2014-05-29 Martin Liska * cgraph.h (expand_thunk): New argument added. (address

[PATCH 1/4] Make coverage_compute_cfg_checksum callable with an argument

2014-05-29 Thread Martin Liška
Hello, this is a small patchset that prepares API for new IPA Identical code folding pass. The patch adds an argument for coverage_compute_cfg_checksum. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk? Thanks, Martin 2014-05-29 Martin Liska * coverage.h (coverage_compute_cf

run dsymutil post lto

2014-05-29 Thread Mike Stump
Jack finally found the answer to a question I had back in 2010… Why, yes, one does have to arrange to run the post ld pass when lto runs but doesn’t have to relink. Committed revision 211067. Thanks Jack. PR debug/61352 * collect2.c (maybe_run_lto_and_relink): Be sure

Re: [PATCH][ARM] FAIL: gcc.target/arm/pr58041.c scan-assembler ldrb

2014-05-29 Thread Maciej W. Rozycki
On Wed, 28 May 2014, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > Ah, light dawns (maybe). > > I guess the problems stem from the attempts to combine Neon with ARMv5. > Neon shouldn't be used with anything prior to ARMv7, since that's the > earliest version of the architecture that can support it. Good to know,

Re: [DOC PATCH] Rewrite docs for inline asm

2014-05-29 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Fixed. Thanks! -- Eric Botcazou

libgo patch committed: Add --without-libatomic configure option

2014-05-29 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
This patch from Peter Collingbourne adds a --without-libatomic configure option to libgo, to make it easier to build libgo outside of the GCC build system. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian diff -r 9e7a28ffe425 libgo/Makefile.am --- a/libg

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 57543

2014-05-29 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi again, On 05/29/2014 03:34 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 05/28/2014 01:06 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Now, I got this "insane" idea: would it make sense to simply invert the substitutions (args and return) unconditionally? If we're going to change the order, I want to do it in a more correct,

Re: RFA: A couple of ira_get_dup_out_num fixes

2014-05-29 Thread Vladimir Makarov
On 05/28/2014 04:32 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > While working on patches to speed up the handling of constraints, > I hit some behaviour in ira_get_dup_out_num that looked unintentional: > > - the check for output operands was part of the !ignored_p condition > so would be skipped if the first

Re: [PATCH] Do not build libsanitizer also for powerpc*-*-linux*

2014-05-29 Thread Peter Bergner
On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 09:36 +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > On Mon, 26 May 2014 18:53:22 +0800, Arseny Solokha wrote: > > Recent changes in GetPcSpBp() (libsanitizer/asan/asan_linux.cc) made it > > impossible to build 4.10.0-alpha20140525 snapshot for powerpc targets. > > I hit this, too

[patch, avr] ata6289 device ISA is updated

2014-05-29 Thread S, Pitchumani
Hi, Device ATA6289 has MUL instruction and it belongs to avr4 ISA. Now it is incorrectly listed under avr25. Attached patch corrects it. Please commit if the patch is OK. I do not have commit access. Regards, Pitchumani 2014-05-29 Pitchumani Sivanupandi * config/avr/avr-mcus.def

patch to fix PR61325

2014-05-29 Thread Vladimir Makarov
The following patch PR61325. The details can be found on https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61325 The patch was bootstrapped and tested on x86/x86-64. Committed as rev. 211060 to gcc-4.9 branch and as rev.211061 to trunk. 2014-05-29 Vladimir Makarov PR rtl-optimizat

Re: [AArch64/ARM 3/3] Add execution tests of ARM EXT intrinsics

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Lawrence
I've just committed this as revision 211059, with the change of adding a _1 suffix to the names of all the new tests (as per standard testsuite convention). All passed on arm-none-eabi and armeb-none-eabi. Cheers, Alan Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Alan Lawrence

Patch RFA: Move x86 _mm_pause out of pragma target("sse") scope

2014-05-29 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
The _mm_pause intrinsic is defined in xmmintrin.h. Right now using it with -m32 with the default -march option gives an error: /home/iant/foo.c: In function ‘f’: /home/iant/gcc/go-install/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.10.0/include/xmmintrin.h:1238:1: error: inlining failed in call to always

Re: PING: PATCH [4/n]: Prepare x32: Permute the conversion and addition if one operand is a constant

2014-05-29 Thread pinskia
> On May 29, 2014, at 10:09 AM, "H.J. Lu" wrote: > >> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:23 AM, wrote: >> >> On May 29, 2014, at 9:13 AM, "H.J. Lu" wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Wed,

Re: ipa-visibility TLC 2/n

2014-05-29 Thread Jan Hubicka
> Jan Hubicka writes: > >> Richard Sandiford wrote the original section anchors implementation, > >> so he would be a good person to comment about the interaction between > >> aliases and section anchors. > > > > Thanks! Richard, does this patch seem sane? > > Looks good to me in principle, but w

Re: PING: PATCH [4/n]: Prepare x32: Permute the conversion and addition if one operand is a constant

2014-05-29 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:23 AM, wrote: > > >> On May 29, 2014, at 9:13 AM, "H.J. Lu" wrote: >> >>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 07/11/2011 05:54

Re: [PATCH AArch64] Remove from arm_neon.h functions not in the spec

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Lawrence
Patch retaining vfmaq_n_f64 attached, updated gcc/ChangeLog: * config/aarch64/arm_neon.h (vmlaq_n_f64, vmlsq_n_f64, vrsrtsq_f64, vcge_p8, vcgeq_p8, vcgez_p8, vcgez_u8, vcgez_u16, vcgez_u32, vcgez_u64, vcgezq_p8, vcgezq_u8, vcgezq_u16, vcgezq_u32, vcgezq_u64, vcgezd_u64,

Re: PING: PATCH [4/n]: Prepare x32: Permute the conversion and addition if one operand is a constant

2014-05-29 Thread pinskia
> On May 29, 2014, at 9:13 AM, "H.J. Lu" wrote: > >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 07/11/2011 05:54 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > The key is the >

Re: PING: PATCH [4/n]: Prepare x32: Permute the conversion and addition if one operand is a constant

2014-05-29 Thread H.J. Lu
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> On 07/11/2011 05:54 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: The key is the > > XEXP (x, 1) == convert_memory_address_addr_space

[PATCH][ARM] Use mov_imm type for movw operations consistently

2014-05-29 Thread Kyrill Tkachov
Hi all, I noticed that in some of our move patterns the movw instruction is given the mov_reg type rather than the mov_imm type that all other uses of movw have. This patch fixes that. Scanning through our pipeline descriptions I see that mov_imm is treated the same way as mov_reg everywhere a

Re: detecting "container overflow" bugs in std::vector

2014-05-29 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 26/05/14 19:19 +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote: It does look useful but I'm concerned about a proliferation of container checks, we already have the libstdc++ Debug Mode and I'd like to see some of the lightweight checks from the Google branch added to trunk too. Me too, but these checks a

Re: ipa-visibility TLC 2/n

2014-05-29 Thread Yufeng Zhang
Hi Honza, I can confirm that with your commit r211045 the arm-none-linux-gnueabi{hf} builds are OK now. Thanks for the fix. Yufeng On 05/28/14 22:56, Jan Hubicka wrote: Any update? I've managed to generate a simple test case from libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/strstream.cc which reproduces the iss

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 57543

2014-05-29 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, On 05/29/2014 03:34 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 05/28/2014 01:06 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Now, I got this "insane" idea: would it make sense to simply invert the substitutions (args and return) unconditionally? If we're going to change the order, I want to do it in a more correct, rather

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 57543

2014-05-29 Thread Jason Merrill
On 05/28/2014 01:06 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Now, I got this "insane" idea: would it make sense to simply invert the substitutions (args and return) unconditionally? If we're going to change the order, I want to do it in a more correct, rather than differently wrong, way. DR 1227 clarified th

Re: [PATCH] Inline asm asan instrumentation

2014-05-29 Thread Yury Gribov
The fact that some region appears in "m" doesn't mean the inline asm actually accesses it, it could not touch it at all, or only some part of it. Do we have precise semantics of "m" written somewhere? My understanding was that even though asm may not touch buffer at all (like e.g. in our tests)

[PATCH AArch64 2/2] Correct signedness of builtins, remove casts from arm_neon.h

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Lawrence
This adds another set of qualifiers to aarch64-builtins.c, and removes more casts from arm_neon.h, for the suqadd, ushl, urshl, urshr_n, ushll_n, and sshl intrinsics. gcc/ChangeLog: * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c (aarch64_types_binop_ssu_qualifiers): New static data.

[PATCH AArch64 1/2] Correct signedness of builtins, remove casts from arm_neon.h

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Lawrence
This adds three new sets of qualifiers to aarch64-builtins.c, and uses the already-present-but-unused USHIFTIMM. gcc/ChangeLog: * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c (aarch64_types_binop_uus_qualifiers, aarch64_types_shift_to_unsigned_qualifiers, aarch64_types_

[PATCH AArch64 0/2] Correct signedness of builtins, remove casts from arm_neon.h

2014-05-29 Thread Alan Lawrence
The __builtin_ functions registered by aarch64_init_simd_builtins use signed and/or unsigned types according to the qualifiers defined in aarch64-builtins.c and used in aarch64-simd-builtins.def. These __builtin functions are then used in arm_neon.h, with explicit casts converting between the si

Re: [PATCH 7/7] Move SYMBOL_REF_FLAGS to rtx header

2014-05-29 Thread Jeff Law
On 05/29/14 06:07, Richard Sandiford wrote: Can't really approve it, but it looks obviously correct to me. Thanks for the fix. Is that something you'd like to see changed? Jeff

Re: [PATCH 7/7] Move SYMBOL_REF_FLAGS to rtx header

2014-05-29 Thread Jeff Law
On 05/29/14 05:27, Tom de Vries wrote: On 10-05-14 22:24, Richard Sandiford wrote: /* A set of flags on a symbol_ref that are, in some respects, redundant with information derivable from the tree decl associated with this symbol. @@ -1791,7 +1794,9 @@ #define SYMBOL_REF_CONSTANT(RTX) \

Re: [PATCH 7/7] Move SYMBOL_REF_FLAGS to rtx header

2014-05-29 Thread Richard Sandiford
Tom de Vries writes: > On 10-05-14 22:24, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> /* A set of flags on a symbol_ref that are, in some respects, redundant >> with >> information derivable from the tree decl associated with this symbol. >> @@ -1791,7 +1794,9 @@ #define SYMBOL_REF_CONSTANT(RTX) \ >>

Re: [DOC PATCH] Rewrite docs for inline asm

2014-05-29 Thread Andrew Haley
On 05/29/2014 11:22 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> Yes. We already know that this is better than the current docs. >> Let's check it in. > > As far as I can see you did it, but didn't add a ChangeLog entry (so David > isn't properly credited with the rewrite)? Fixed. Thanks, Andrew.

Re: [PATCH 7/7] Move SYMBOL_REF_FLAGS to rtx header

2014-05-29 Thread Tom de Vries
On 10-05-14 22:24, Richard Sandiford wrote: /* A set of flags on a symbol_ref that are, in some respects, redundant with information derivable from the tree decl associated with this symbol. @@ -1791,7 +1794,9 @@ #define SYMBOL_REF_CONSTANT(RTX) \ this information to avoid recomputing

RE: [PATCH] Inline asm asan instrumentation

2014-05-29 Thread Marat Zakirov
Actually I do not think that this is good idea to use constraints in a such arbitrary way. By setting constraints user takes responsibility on himself. So even if full inline asm support will be done one day, I do think that checking memory constraints will be still exist. It is the same situation

[PATCH, Pointer Bounds Checker 13/x] Early versioning

2014-05-29 Thread Ilya Enkovich
Hi, This patch allows to perform function versioning when some structures are not available yet. It is required to make clones for Pointer Bounds Checker right after SSA build. Bootstrapped and tested on linux-x86_64. Thanks, Ilya -- gcc/ 2014-05-29 Ilya Enkovich * tree-inline.c

[PATCH, i386, Pointer Bounds Checker 12/x] Recognize instrumented special functions

2014-05-29 Thread Ilya Enkovich
Hi, This patch allows to recognize instrumented call to special function by using the original function name for recognition. Bootstrapped and tested on linux-x86_64. Thanks, Ilya -- gcc/ 2014-05-29 Ilya Enkovich * calls.c (special_function_p): Use original decl name when a

[PATCH, i386, Pointer Bounds Checker 11/x] Keep bounds initial values

2014-05-29 Thread Ilya Enkovich
Hi, This patch tries to keep bounds initial values when it may be needed. Even if initial value is not fully known (e.g. we know only low bound) it still may help to remove some redundant checks. Bootstrapped and tested on linux-x86_64. Thanks, Ilya -- gcc/ 2013-05-29 Ilya Enkovich

Re: RFA: cache enabled attribute by insn code

2014-05-29 Thread Richard Sandiford
Richard Earnshaw writes: > On 27/05/14 16:07, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> Richard Sandiford writes: >>> Richard Sandiford writes: Does the following patch help? >>> >>> Bah, it won't of course: %i1 needs to be the operator. >> >> Here's v2. I tested that it worked for simple tests like: >

RE: [PATCH] Inline asm asan instrumentation

2014-05-29 Thread Marat Zakirov
>> asm-struct-1.c test looks like a false positive though - the code does not >> access any invalid memory, it only does a harmless pointer cast. It is not. Because st1 have smaller size than st2: struct st1 { int a[110]; } struct st2 { int a[111]; }; And asm constrain was declared as:

Re: [DOC PATCH] Rewrite docs for inline asm

2014-05-29 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Yes. We already know that this is better than the current docs. > Let's check it in. As far as I can see you did it, but didn't add a ChangeLog entry (so David isn't properly credited with the rewrite)? -- Eric Botcazou

Re: RTABI half-precision conversion functions (ping)

2014-05-29 Thread Julian Brown
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 14:47:54 +0100 Julian Brown wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:54:57 +0100 > Paul Brook wrote: > > > > But, that means EABI-conformant callers are also perfectly > > > entitled to sign-extend half-float values before calling our > > > helper functions (although GCC itself won't

Re: [PATCH] Inline asm asan instrumentation

2014-05-29 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 05:33:44PM +0400, Marat Zakirov wrote: > Here's a patch for optional Asan instrumentation of inline assembly. > > This version scans gimple for GIMPLE_ASMs and performs usual instrumentation > of arguments with memory constraints ("m", "o", etc.) with fixed size. That does

Re: [Patch] Minor fixes for regtesting gfortran with -flto

2014-05-29 Thread Uros Bizjak
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Dominique Dhumieres wrote: >> Probably, alpha is not the only one that fails this assumption. > > Indeed! see the thread starting at > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-05/msg00127.html > > Could you test the following patch > > --- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfort

Re: [PATCH] Inline asm asan instrumentation

2014-05-29 Thread Evgeniy Stepanov
Cool, we don't have this in LLVM-ASan, but we have plans to instrument inline asm soon (not just constraints). asm-struct-1.c test looks like a false positive though - the code does not access any invalid memory, it only does a harmless pointer cast. On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Konstantin

RE: [PATCH] Fix PR54733 Optimize endian independent load/store

2014-05-29 Thread Thomas Preud'homme
> From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:sch...@linux-m68k.org] > "Thomas Preud'homme" writes: > > > By the way, I couldn't understand how you reached the value > > 0x44434241. Can you explain me? > > Each byte is composed of the first 7 bits of the original byte. Sorry, it seems I wasn't very awake when

Re: RFA: cache enabled attribute by insn code

2014-05-29 Thread Richard Earnshaw
On 27/05/14 16:07, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Richard Sandiford writes: >> Richard Sandiford writes: >>> Does the following patch help? >> >> Bah, it won't of course: %i1 needs to be the operator. > > Here's v2. I tested that it worked for simple tests like: > > int f1 (int x, int y) { return

Re: [MIPS] Add sbasic supoert ffor MSA (SIMD)

2014-05-29 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On May 28, 2014, at 7:27 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> >> Speed of implementation. We're gradually replacing these with proper >> builtins, but that takes a lot more work. > > As an owner of a port with more builtins that yours, I can offer a

Re: [Patch] Minor fixes for regtesting gfortran with -flto

2014-05-29 Thread Dominique Dhumieres
> Probably, alpha is not the only one that fails this assumption. Indeed! see the thread starting at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-05/msg00127.html Could you test the following patch --- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/bind_c_array_params_2.f90 2014-05-24 16:17:53.0 +020

RE: [MIPS] Add sbasic supoert ffor MSA (SIMD)

2014-05-29 Thread Matthew Fortune
Mike Stump writes: > On May 28, 2014, at 7:27 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > > > Speed of implementation. We're gradually replacing these with proper > > builtins, but that takes a lot more work. > > As an owner of a port with more builtins that yours, I can offer a > technological solution to

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR54733 Optimize endian independent load/store

2014-05-29 Thread Andreas Schwab
"Thomas Preud'homme" writes: > By the way, I couldn't understand how you reached the value > 0x44434241. Can you explain me? Each byte is composed of the first 7 bits of the original byte. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 4

Re: -fuse-caller-save - Collect register usage information

2014-05-29 Thread Tom de Vries
On 29-05-14 00:42, Bill Schmidt wrote: Tom, the final version of this patch that you committed breaks bootstrap on powerpc64le-linux-gnu. The problem is that all uses of the variable i are guarded by #ifdef STACK_REGS, but the declaration of i is unconditional. We get an unused variable warning

Re: [Patch] Minor fixes for regtesting gfortran with -flto

2014-05-29 Thread Uros Bizjak
Hello! > With the following patch, gfortran can be regtested with -flto > with no failure, but pr54852 and pr60061. -! { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "myBindC" 1 { target { ! { hppa*-*-hpux* } } } } } -! { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "myBindC,%r2" 1 { target { hppa*-*-hpux* } } } } +! { dg

RE: [PATCH] Fix PR54733 Optimize endian independent load/store

2014-05-29 Thread Thomas Preud'homme
> From: Andreas Schwab [mailto:sch...@linux-m68k.org] > > This adds a full byte of padding between each bitfield. If you want a > single padding bit you should use :1, but you also need to update the > test to check for 0x44434241 (0x88868482 is impossible, since that > requires at least 8 bits p

Re: ipa-visibility TLC 2/n

2014-05-29 Thread Richard Sandiford
Jan Hubicka writes: >> Richard Sandiford wrote the original section anchors implementation, >> so he would be a good person to comment about the interaction between >> aliases and section anchors. > > Thanks! Richard, does this patch seem sane? Looks good to me in principle, but with: > + s