On 10/02/13 13:40, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
Dear steering committee, To support the _Cilk_spawn, and _Cilk_sync
implementation in GCC (patch submitted link:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00859.html), we need to
add a foreign library (Cilk Runtime Library) into the gcc repository.
MIPS16 code can't do atomic operations directly, so it calls into out-of-line
versions that are compiled as -mno-mips16. These out-of-line versions use
the same open-coded implementation as you'd get in normal -mno-mips16 code.
This is done by libgcc/sync.c, which contains code like like:
MIPS16 code can't do atomic operations directly, so it calls into out-of-line
versions that are compiled as -mno-mips16. These out-of-line versions use
the same open-coded implementation as you'd get in normal -mno-mips16 code.
Hmm, and I assume you don't want to use target attribute for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #28 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch ---
updated to the new revision
gcc version 4.9.0 20131007 (experimental) [gomp-4_0-branch revision 203250]
(GCC)
[innocent@olsnba04 parallel]$ setenv OMP_PROC_BIND
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58630
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58641
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5)
I think we just want to copy the following from
nonoverlapping_component_refs_p:
/* If we're left with accessing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #29 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 30967
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=30967action=edit
Y
Ah, thanks, I can see where the failing sched_getaffinity calls are coming
from,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58642
--- Comment #30 from vincenzo Innocente vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch ---
better: as usual nastier bugs are in the tests!
[innocent@olsnba04 parallel]$ strace ./affinity-1.exe | grep affin
execve(./affinity-1.exe, [./affinity-1.exe], [/* 61
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58662
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58423
--- Comment #2 from xuepeng guo xguo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: xguo
Date: Tue Oct 8 07:58:08 2013
New Revision: 203267
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203267root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-10-08 Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@linaro.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What if both bit fields have different DECL_BIT_FIELD_REPRESENTATIVE?
Then they can't possibly overlap?
Probably, yes, that could be a nice enhancement.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58662
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58619
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ramana
Date: Tue Oct 8 08:34:28 2013
New Revision: 203269
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203269root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/58619
2013-10-08
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58660
--- Comment #1 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Please post patches to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org and x-ref this PR.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58661
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58645
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
--- Comment #11 from Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #10)
and regcprop substitues d19 for d18 in insn 27, missing the fact that insn
73 is swapping the two values (thus clobbering the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58480
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: glisse
Date: Tue Oct 8 10:39:49 2013
New Revision: 203271
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203271root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-10-08 Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58480
Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58483
Bug 58483 depends on bug 58480, which changed state.
Bug 58480 Summary: Use attribute((nonnull)) to optimize callers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58480
What|Removed |Added
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hmm, interesting. Perhaps single_set should not do this if the dead set
clobbers an input.
Yes, that seems to be a sensible proposal, but single_set is an old thing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58662
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Actually, I think it's the uncprop:
--- Q.c.139t.crited22013-10-08 13:03:04.169955615 +0200
+++ Q.c.141t.uncprop12013-10-08 13:03:04.169955615 +0200
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58659
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 8 12:33:37 2013
New Revision: 203274
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203274root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/58659
*
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.9.0 20131008 (experimental)
15b4: Abbrev Number: 5 (DW_TAG_subprogram)
5b5 DW_AT_name
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42118
Lionel GUEZ ebay.20.tedlap at spamgourmet dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58659
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Oct 8 13:38:21 2013
New Revision: 203277
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203277root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/58659
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58659
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57850
--- Comment #12 from Dima dmitrij.ledkov at ubuntu dot com ---
Is this going to be applied for 4.9 4.8 series?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58663
--- Comment #1 from Jan Kratochvil jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com ---
#include stdlib.h
int main(void) {
char *p=malloc(1);
p[1]=1;
return 0;
}
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58542
--- Comment #5 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
The problem actually starts in expand_atomic_compare_and_swap, in:
(gdb) list
7339 create_convert_operand_to (ops[3], expected, mode, true);
7340
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58619
--- Comment #5 from dehao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dehao
Date: Tue Oct 8 16:22:57 2013
New Revision: 203284
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203284root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backport r203269.
PR tree-optimization/58619
2013-10-08 Dehao
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42118
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42118
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #7)
By the way, the Fortran committee is considering to deprecate FORALL in the
next standard (Fortran 2015) because it considers FORALL
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58619
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
Eric,
there is one more thing to consider for your proposed patch,
that is the damned -fstrict-volatile-bitfields:
if strict_volatile_bitfields0 and the BIT_FIELD access
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58633
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
there is one more thing to consider for your proposed patch,
that is the damned -fstrict-volatile-bitfields:
if strict_volatile_bitfields0 and the BIT_FIELD access
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot de ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #10)
there is one more thing to consider for your proposed patch,
that is the damned -fstrict-volatile-bitfields:
if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58542
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58542
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression]|[4.7/4.8/4.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58542
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58570
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org ---
No. You only assume an alias if _both_ fields are bit fields.
But in my example only one a is a volatile bit field the other
is a normal member b.
Then they won't be affected
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58664
Bug ID: 58664
Summary: [c++11] ICE initializing array of incomplete type
within union
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58664
Volker Reichelt reichelt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58665
Bug ID: 58665
Summary: [4.9 Regression] ICE with using incomplete struct
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58665
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58665
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 8 21:54:06 2013
New Revision: 203288
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203288root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-10-08 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58448
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 8 21:54:06 2013
New Revision: 203288
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203288root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-10-08 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58665
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58448
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58568
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 8 21:58:58 2013
New Revision: 203289
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203289root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-10-08 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58568
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Oct 8 22:29:49 2013
New Revision: 203290
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203290root=gccview=rev
Log:
/cp
2013-10-08 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54367
Bug 54367 depends on bug 58568, which changed state.
Bug 58568 Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] [c++11] ICE with lambda in invalid
template variable definition
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58568
What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58568
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Attached is an early version (C only) for #pragma ivdep, which aids
vectorization by setting (for the following for-loop) loop-safelen to
INT_MAX. [In the final version, I will also add parsing support for C++
and use it for Fortran's do concurrent.]
As suggested by Richard and Jakub
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:51:50AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
--- a/gcc/cfgloop.c
+++ b/gcc/cfgloop.c
@@ -507,6 +507,39 @@ flow_loops_find (struct loops *loops)
loop-latch = latch;
}
}
+ /* Search for ANNOTATE call with annot_expr_ivdep_kind; if found,
Hi!
Here are a few cleanup patches, mostly in the realm of OpenMP, so Jakub
gets a CC. OK to commit?
libgomp/
* omp.h.in: Don't touch the user's namespace.
---
libgomp/omp.h.in | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git libgomp/omp.h.in libgomp/omp.h.in
Ping~
Thanks,
Kugan
+2013-09-25 Kugan Vivekanandarajah kug...@linaro.org
+
+ * dojump.c (do_compare_and_jump): Generate rtl without
+ zero/sign extension if redundant.
+ * cfgexpand.c (expand_gimple_stmt_1): Likewise.
+ * gimple.c
Hi!
Got a warning turned into error during bootstrap that name might be used
uninitialized. Fixed by not using it at all, there is no point to duplicate
the clause names when we have omp_clause_code_name array.
2013-10-08 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
* c-typeck.c
Hi!
As reported by Vincenzo, the testcase didn't try to verify affinity behavior
if _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF returned value was smaller than kernel's internal
mask size (e.g. because of CPU hotplug support). Fixed thusly:
2013-10-08 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
*
OK, what do you think of it now?
My take on this is that the Proper Fix(tm) has been posted by Martin:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg00082.html
IMO it's a no-brainer, modulo the ABI concern. Everything else is more or
less clever stuff to paper over this original
Hi,
this is a regression on the mainline introduced by my tree-ssa-alias.c change:
2013-04-17 Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
* tree-ssa-alias.c (nonoverlapping_component_refs_of_decl_p): New.
(decl_refs_may_alias_p): Add REF1 and REF2 parameters.
Use
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg02000.html
Thanks in advance.
--
Eric Botcazou
Can someone comment / approve it quickly so that we get AArch32 and AArch64
linux cross-builds back up ?
Ok.
Applied for Dehao as r203269 . Tests on arm came back ok.
Ramana
Thanks,
Richard.
regards
Ramana
Honza
Dehao
Honza
Hi Honza,
I am planning to update the scheduler descriptions for bdver3 first.
Attached is the patch. Please let me know your comments if any.
Though I agree on merging bdver1/2 and bdver3 on most parts, the FP lines and
decoding schemes are different. So, let me know how can I approach merging
Hello,
There are several tests that use dg-add-options bind_pic_locally in order to
add -fPIE or -fpie when -fPIC or -fpic are used respectively with the expecta-
tion that -fPIE/-fpie will override -fPIC/-fpic. But this doesn't happen since
since -fPIE/-fpie will be added before the -fPIC/-fpic
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:01:37, Eric Botcazou wrote:
OK, what do you think of it now?
My take on this is that the Proper Fix(tm) has been posted by Martin:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg00082.html
IMO it's a no-brainer, modulo the ABI concern. Everything else is more or
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 10:14:59AM +0100, Vidya Praveen wrote:
There are several tests that use dg-add-options bind_pic_locally in order to
add -fPIE or -fpie when -fPIC or -fpic are used respectively with the expecta-
tion that -fPIE/-fpie will override -fPIC/-fpic. But this doesn't happen
Hi Honza,
I am planning to update the scheduler descriptions for bdver3 first.
Attached is the patch. Please let me know your comments if any.
Though I agree on merging bdver1/2 and bdver3 on most parts, the FP lines and
decoding schemes are different. So, let me know how can I approach
Hi all,
This is a resubmission of my previous demangler fix [1] rewritten
to avoid using hashtables and other libiberty features.
From the above referenced email:
d_print_comp maintains a certain amount of scope across calls (namely
a stack of templates) which is used when evaluating references
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/07/2013 04:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com
wrote:
this patch consolidates tree-ssa-loop*.c files with new .h files as
required
(8 in total)
A
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:33 AM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Hello,
this patch asserts that when we call a function with the nonnull
attribute,
the corresponding
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
Hi,
this is a regression on the mainline introduced by my tree-ssa-alias.c change:
2013-04-17 Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
* tree-ssa-alias.c (nonoverlapping_component_refs_of_decl_p): New.
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
Hi,
this fixes the ICE during the build of the Ada runtime on the SPARC, a fallout
of the recent inliner changes:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg01033.html
The ICE is triggered because the ldd
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
This patch moves the prototypes for tree-eh.c into a new file tree-eh.h.
This file is in fact really gimple-eh.. we'll rename that later with the
other tree-gimple renaming that is needed.
however,
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
This patch clears the rest of the improperly located prototypes out of
tree-flow.h. A bit larger than the last few, but I was pushing to clear
this up, and its not quite as bad as it seems :-)
Of interest:
*
On Mon, 7 Oct 2013, Joern Rennecke wrote:
OK to commit?
Yes, this looks good to me, thanks!
While you are at it, your entry in gcc/doc/contrib.texi could
do with an update as well. :-)
Gerald
On 10/08/2013 05:57 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/07/2013 04:44 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com
wrote:
this patch consolidates tree-ssa-loop*.c files with
On 10/08/2013 06:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
This patch clears the rest of the improperly located prototypes out of
tree-flow.h. A bit larger than the last few, but I was pushing to clear
this up, and its not quite as
PR libstdc++/58659
* include/bits/shared_ptr_base.h (__shared_count::__shared_count(P,D)):
Delegate to constructor taking allocator.
(__shared_count::_S_create_from_up): Inline into ...
(__shared_count::__shared_count(unique_ptrY,D): Here. Use
On 10/08/2013 07:38 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/08/2013 05:57 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Hm.
Index: loop-iv.c
===
*** loop-iv.c (revision 203243)
--- loop-iv.c (working copy)
*** along with GCC; see the file
On 10/08/2013 08:35 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/08/2013 07:38 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/08/2013 05:57 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Hm.
Index: loop-iv.c
===
*** loop-iv.c (revision 203243)
--- loop-iv.c (working copy)
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/08/2013 08:35 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/08/2013 07:38 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 10/08/2013 05:57 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Hm.
Index: loop-iv.c
On 8 October 2013 13:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
PR libstdc++/58659
* include/bits/shared_ptr_base.h
(__shared_count::__shared_count(P,D)):
Delegate to constructor taking allocator.
(__shared_count::_S_create_from_up): Inline into ...
This is forwarded from PR58660
(http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58660). Please CC me on
replies as I am not on the list.
In doing some testing of GCC 4.7.3 on a target with an ARMv4T CPU (e.g.
ARM7T or ARM9) I encountered a problem if using Thumb mode with
interworking disabled. For
2013-10-08 Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com
* testsuite/*: Remove stray semi-colons after function definitions.
Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk.
commit 2c5f00a242d9aaf12cfcad0d217c4cad5b25b711
Author: Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com
Date: Tue Oct 8 14:16:59 2013
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 10:30:22AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 10:14:59AM +0100, Vidya Praveen wrote:
There are several tests that use dg-add-options bind_pic_locally in order
to
add -fPIE or -fpie when -fPIC or -fpic are used respectively with the
expecta-
On 10/08/2013 09:18 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Andrew MacLeod amacl...@redhat.com wrote:
I just took a quick stab at it... I think its pretty involved and someone
with better loop comprehension should probably look at the followup of
removing that requirement.
On 1 October 2013 12:40, Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@arm.com wrote:
Patch attached.
/Marcus
2013-10-01 Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@arm.com
* configure.ac (AC_CHECK_FUNCS_ONCE): Add for exit() then make
existing AC_CHECK_FUNCS_ONCE dependent on outcome.
Ping.
Hi!
These tests were expecting 5 loopfn matches, 3 on the fn definition, one
as GOMP_parallel_start argument and one called in between
GOMP_parallel_start and GOMP_parallel_end. But the new API is
to call GOMP_parallel with the function and not call the outlined
function nor GOMP_parallel_end
Hi!
I've noticed that udr-8.C failed on i686-linux, apparently because i
was uninitialized. udr-3.c had the same bug, but didn't FAIL because
of that on either x86_64-linux nor i686-linux, and udr-2.c had just
unused variable.
2013-10-08 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
*
Hi,
This patch implements the behavior of the following
neon intrinsics using C:
vneg[q]_f[32,64]
vneg[q]_s[8,16,32,64]
Regression tests for listed intrinsics included.
I ran a full regression test for aarch64-none-elf
with no regressions.
Ok?
Thanks,
Alex
gcc/testsuite/
2013-10-08 Alex
OK.
Jason
Hi,
This patch implements the behavior of vdiv_f64 intrinsic
and adds regression tests for vdiv[q]_f[32,64] NEON intrinsics.
Full aarch64-none-elf regression test ran with no regressions.
Is it OK?
Thanks,
Alex
gcc/testsuite/
2013-09-10 Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com
*
Thanks for applying the patch. Backported to google-4_8
I still have some concern when inlining .part function into its
original function: basically, the gimple_block for that call may be
NULL, but it does not make sense to clear all block info for all stmts
in the .part function.
Dehao
On Tue,
Hi,
This patch implements the behavior of vadd_f64 and
vsub_f64 NEON intrinsics. Regression tests are added.
Regression tests for aarch64-none-elf completed with no
regressions.
OK?
Thanks,
Alex
gcc/testsuite/
2013-10-08 Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com
*
Hi,
This patch implements the behavior and regression
test for NEON intrinsics vclz[q]_[s,u][8,16,32]
No problems found when running aarch64-none-elf
regressions tests.
Is patch OK?
Thanks,
Alex
gcc/testsuite/
2013-10-08 Alex Velenko alex.vele...@arm.com
*
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
