Why is it that Makefile.def includes:
// "missing" indicates that that module doesn't supply
// that recursive target in its Makefile.
[...]
host_modules= { module= fixincludes;
missing= info;
missing= dvi;
missing= pdf;
missing=
hi,
can any one tell me what is the difference between gcc-ada and
differnt other compiler for Ada 95 like GNAT GPL, GNAT Pro,
what is procedure to build only language Ada by using source code og gcc-4.1???
On behalf of Red Hat I would like to publish patches to add support
for the Toshiba Media Processor (MeP) to GCC 3.4.
We don't expect this port to be accepted into the gcc source tree
as-is, as the 3.4 branch is closed to new ports, and this port needs
some core gcc changes. We don't yet have a p
2007/2/15, Dorit Nuzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
"Jiahua He" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/02/2007 22:54:08:
> Oh, I see. For reduction and induction, you don't need to deal with
> the condition with vdef. I am considering how to implement an idiom
> with vdef, like SCAN (prefix sum). And by the w
"Jiahua He" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/02/2007 22:54:08:
> Oh, I see. For reduction and induction, you don't need to deal with
> the condition with vdef. I am considering how to implement an idiom
> with vdef, like SCAN (prefix sum). And by the way, do you support
> idioms with vuses?
>
You
OK, I see what you mean. The reason you can get both (ior (ashift ...)
(lshiftrt ...)) and (ior (lshiftrt ...) (ashift ...)) is that simplify-rtx.c
has no rule to canonicalize such expressions and that LSHIFTRT and
ASHIFT have the same precedence.
Hmm, in simplify_binary_operation_1(), it s
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 08:30:52PM +, Sami Khawam wrote:
> Hi Rask,
>
> Basically the CPU has the 'SCALE_28_4' instruction which does the following:
> output = (operand1 >> 28) | (operand2 << 4)
>
> From my understanding the OR operation (ior), doesn't get canonicalized
> since it's second
On 2/15/07, Dorit Nuzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while playing with gcc-4.3 rev. 121994, i encountered a problem with
> autovectorisation.
>
> In the following simple code, the inner loop of c1() becomes vectorized
as
> expected, but the inner loop of c2() not because of
>
>test2
> Hi,
>
> while playing with gcc-4.3 rev. 121994, i encountered a problem with
> autovectorisation.
>
> In the following simple code, the inner loop of c1() becomes vectorized
as
> expected, but the inner loop of c2() not because of
>
>test2.c:15: note: = analyze_loop_nest =
>test2.
Hi,
while playing with gcc-4.3 rev. 121994, i encountered a problem with
autovectorisation.
In the following simple code, the inner loop of c1() becomes vectorized as
expected, but the inner loop of c2() not because of
test2.c:15: note: = analyze_loop_nest =
test2.c:15: note: ==
Hi Andrew,
You mean using a DI rotate left by 4 and then saving the output as SI
(saving the hi part and ignoring the low one) ?
Also, how is canonicalization detected anyway? Are there rules that gcc
follows? How can they be changed?
Sami
Andrew Pinski wrote:
output = (operand1 >> 28)
11 matches
Mail list logo
