--- Comment #10 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-16 06:30
---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 20:21 +, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
What do you think? Please let me know what your MIPS tests turned up.
I'm
--- Comment #12 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-17 04:29
---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 13:29 +, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Could you retest the MIPS fixed-point testcases with the obvious fix? You
--- Comment #8 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-06-07 22:18 ---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 21:34 +, bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Jim, are you still working on this or should I pick it up?
I'm working
--- Comment #3 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-05-03 22:28 ---
Subject: Re: suboptimal MIPS widening multiply accumulate
On Tue, 2010-04-27 at 09:33 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
For more general optimization you might want to move all this code to
the tree
--- Comment #3 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-04-23 22:40 ---
Subject: Re: New: Emit debug info allowing inlined functions
to show in stack traces
On 04/21/2010 02:26 AM, scovich at gmail dot com wrote:
It would be very nice if gcc emitted debug information that allowed
--- Comment #4 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-04-20 01:54 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] New test failures
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 00:01 +, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:
Any ideas on how to fix the compiler? The best idea I could come up with was
to check each
--- Comment #5 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-04-09 22:16 ---
Subject: Re: Unexpected error message for bad command line
argument
On 04/09/2010 02:34 PM, wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
POSIX says that for command line arguments -a -d, -d -a, -da, and -ad
are all
--- Comment #3 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-25 23:21 ---
Subject: Re: gcc.dg/pr43058.c uses way too
memory on ia64
On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 19:05 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Did you test earlier versions of GCC with the testcase?
I hadn't gotten around
--- Comment #13 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-23 02:11
---
Subject: Re: [ia64] Inappropriate address spills
On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 20:48 +, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:
Since the proposed patch to meant to address non-optimimal code generation I
decided to try
--- Comment #9 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-17 23:25 ---
Subject: Re: [ia64] Inappropriate address spills
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 22:09 +, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:
I tried the patch and didn't have any problem bootstrapping and I didn't see
any regressions
--- Comment #11 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-18 00:12
---
Subject: Re: [ia64] Inappropriate address spills
On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 23:47 +, sje at cup dot hp dot com wrote:
Reading Richard's initial comment I thought the problem was that the code was
(or could
--- Comment #6 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-17 01:46 ---
Subject: Re: New: [4.4 regression] ICE in final_scan_insn,
at final.c:2604
The testcase has
if (newCapacity std::numeric_limitssize_t::max() / sizeof(T))
do { *(int *)(uintptr_t
--- Comment #5 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-13 08:23 ---
Subject: Re: [ia64] Inappropriate address spills
On third thought...
The code here makes sense if we were having problems with invalid
constant recombinations. symbol+const gets split by ia64_expand_move
--- Comment #2 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-13 03:03 ---
Subject: Re: [ia64] Inappropriate address spills
This broke between gcc-4.0.0 and gcc-4.1.2. It appears to be the patch
for PR 28490. There is a test in ia64_legitimate_constant_p for symbol
+offset, where we
--- Comment #4 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-03-13 03:16 ---
Subject: Re: [ia64] Inappropriate address spills
Or maybe we should just accept any constant here? I tried that, and for
typedef struct table { int a; int b; int c; } table;
extern table mv_tables[10];
void
--- Comment #11 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2010-02-06 06:23
---
Subject: Re: Optimization flag -O1 -fschedule-insns2
cause red zone to be used when there is none
On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 10:48 +, rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
I've been testing the attached patch
--- Comment #6 from wilson at codesourcery dot com 2009-03-16 19:07 ---
Subject: Re: Branch registers loaded too late
on ia64
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-16 08:46
---
Can someone point me to the IA64
17 matches
Mail list logo
