Snapshot gcc-5-20170117 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20170117/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
On 01/17/2017 03:41 PM, Steve Silva wrote:
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for your advice. I retooled the addhi3 sequence to look like this:
The md.texi file seems to have exactly the example you need:
Here for example, is how the 68000 halfword-add
instruction is defined:
@smallexample
(define_insn "
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for your advice. I retooled the addhi3 sequence to look like this:
(define_expand "addhi3"
[(set (match_operand:HI 0 "snap_mem_or_reg""+a,m")
(plus:HI (match_operand:HI 1 "snap_mem_or_reg" "%0,0")
(match_operand:HI 2 "general_operand" "aim,aim")))]
""
""
)
(define
On 01/17/2017 12:19 PM, Steve Silva via gcc wrote:
Hi All,
I am porting gcc for an internal processor and I am having some issues with
math instructions. Our processor uses two operands for math instructions which
are usually of the form OP0 = OP0 + OP1. The RTL pattern (for addm3) in gcc
On 01/17/2017 09:59 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 01/17/2017 08:30 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/16/2017 05:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I've run into this failure during make check in the past with
a very large make -j value (such as -j128), but today I've had
two consecutive make check runs fail with
Hi All,
I am porting gcc for an internal processor and I am having some issues with
math instructions. Our processor uses two operands for math instructions which
are usually of the form OP0 = OP0 + OP1. The RTL pattern (for addm3) in gcc
uses the form OP0 = OP1 + OP2. I understand that gcc
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 01/17/2017 08:30 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On 01/16/2017 05:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>>
>>> I've run into this failure during make check in the past with
>>> a very large make -j value (such as -j128), but today I've had
>>> two consecu
On Thu, 2016-11-17 at 12:12 -0800, Bin Fan wrote:
> On 11/14/2016 4:34 PM, Bin Fan wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I have an updated version of libatomic ABI specification draft. Please
> > take a look to see if it matches GCC implementation. The purpose of
> > this document is to establish an officia
On 01/17/2017 08:30 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/16/2017 05:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I've run into this failure during make check in the past with
a very large make -j value (such as -j128), but today I've had
two consecutive make check runs fail with -j12 and -j8 on my 8
core laptop with no much
Now you can benefit from our network of over 2,400 lenders and fund managers.
If you have a scenario (comm. or residential) that you can't seem to get funded
using your regular channels, why not send it to us and we'll try and match your
deal to a lender who can get it closed. Our lenders don't
On 01/16/2017 05:37 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I've run into this failure during make check in the past with
a very large make -j value (such as -j128), but today I've had
two consecutive make check runs fail with -j12 and -j8 on my 8
core laptop with no much else going on. The last thing running
w
On Tue, 17 Jan 2017, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For this (reduced) test case
>
>
> extern int x, y, z;
> void foo(void);
> void bar(void);
> void blah(void);
>
> void test (void)
> {
> int flag = 0;
> flag = ((x && y) || z);
>
> if (flag && x && y) {
> bar();
> }
Hi,
For this (reduced) test case
extern int x, y, z;
void foo(void);
void bar(void);
void blah(void);
void test (void)
{
int flag = 0;
flag = ((x && y) || z);
if (flag && x && y) {
bar();
}
}
I expected gcc -Os (x86_64, if it matters) to generate code equivalent to
if (x &
13 matches
Mail list logo
