https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
--- Comment #4 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
yes it's only for the SH4A fpchg case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
--- Comment #5 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
ah I see, I was on the 4.8 where toggle_pr was indeed a single pattern.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
Mikhail Maltsev miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Hi,
On Wed, 20 May 2015, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
I'm not sure... you'd require the compiler to perform static analysis of
loops to determine the state of the machine when they exit (if they exit!)
in order to show whether or not a dependency is carried to subsequent
operations. If it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66211
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||6.0
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 03:00:16PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
Jakub, for avoidance of doubt, the proposed refactoring makes sense to
me, but does need your approval:
This is ok for trunk.
Jakub
On Thu, 21 May 2015 14:38:19 +0100
Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015 15:21:54 +0200
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 02:05:12PM +0100, Julian Brown wrote:
OpenACC handles function calls specially (calling them routines
-- of
I've just noticed that we print note: declared here even for builtins.
E.g.:
void
foo (void)
{
__builtin_return ();
}
q.cc: In function ‘void foo()’:
q.cc:4:21: error: too few arguments to function ‘void __builtin_return(void*)’
__builtin_return ();
^
built-in: note:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 02:38:19PM +0100, Julian Brown wrote:
All functions will behave that way, or just some using some magic
attribute etc.? Say will newlib functions behave this way (math
functions, printf, ...)?
It's actually unclear at this point if regular functions are
I'm at the moment tearing apart a large patch that adds support for
vectorizing reductions in basic-blocks as well as making loop
vectorizing reduction chains with patterns work.
This is a first piece - allow the reduction patterns be detected
when reduction detection didn't run and remove an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65283
--- Comment #3 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Thanks for the pointer.
Still, if this
(define_attr in_delay_slot yes,no
(eq_attr type fpscr_toggle) (const_string no)
is changed to yes, the delay-branch will not consider
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
Created attachment 35589
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35589action=edit
pr34999.gcda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org ---
The profile files differ in a few bytes.
9 17 ^O 265 M-5
10 217 M-^O 44 $
11 323 M-S 301 M-A
12 166 v165 u
21 146 f376 M-~
22 213 M-^K 233 M-^[
23 166 v 32 ^Z
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66244
Bug ID: 66244
Summary: ICE in lhd_set_decl_assembler_name
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66243
Bug ID: 66243
Summary: enum class value is allowed to be initialized by value
from other enum class
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66238
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:59 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
X32 doesn't support indirect branch via 32-bit memory slot since
indirect branch will load 64-bit address from 64-bit memory slot.
Since x32 GOT slot is
On Thu, 21 May 2015 15:21:54 +0200
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 02:05:12PM +0100, Julian Brown wrote:
OpenACC handles function calls specially (calling them routines
-- of varying sorts, gang, worker, vector or seq, affecting where
they can be invoked
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:38:44PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
I've also verified this is one of the changes ultimately necessary to
resolve the code generation regressions caused by Venkat's combine.c
change on the PA across my 300+ testfiles for a PA cross compiler.
How much does it help, do
On 05/21/2015 09:44 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
+ if (!DECL_BUILT_IN (fndecl))
I think you want DECL_IS_BUILTIN. OK with that change.
Jason
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Let's have a look at the standard (F2008, 12.8.2, last sentence):
In the array case, the values of the elements, if any, of the result are
the same as would have been obtained if the scalar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66243
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Pedro Alves pal...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/21/2015 10:12 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
My original proposal, for x86_64 only, was to add
-fno-plt=function-name. This lets the user decide for which
functions PLT must be avoided. Let the compiler always generate
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66243
Nathan Sidwell nathan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66181
Jose E. Marchesi jose.marchesi at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 01:42:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Paul E. McKenney
paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
The compiler can (and does) speculate non-atomic non-volatile writes
in some cases, but I do not believe that it is permitted to speculate
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:51:50PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
On 05/21/2015 10:12 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
My original proposal, for x86_64 only, was to add
-fno-plt=function-name. This lets the user decide for which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43486
--- Comment #10 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Matthew Woehlke from comment #8)
Can this *please* get fixed? This really hurts the ability to use
-Wzero-as-null-ptr in particular. See
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:51:50PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
On 05/21/2015 10:12 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
My original proposal, for x86_64 only, was to add
-fno-plt=function-name. This lets the user decide for which
functions PLT must be avoided. Let the compiler always generate an
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:01 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/21/2015 05:59 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+(define_predicate x32_sibcall_memory_operand
+ (and (match_operand 0 memory_operand)
+ (match_test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65979
--- Comment #26 from Kazumoto Kojima kkojima at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #25)
So, if I understand correctly ...
- 4.9.something doesn't bootstrap because of something unknown
- 5.something doesn't bootstrap
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20150521 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20150521/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.8 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
--- Comment #4 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu May 21 21:58:57 2015
New Revision: 223505
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223505root=gccview=rev
Log:
Allow indirect branch via GOT slot for x32
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66231
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43486
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||darlingm
Jason,
this fixes 65936, where we have two identical types with mismatching
TYPE_CANONICAL. The problem comes from template decl creation vs template
instantiation.
At the point we create 'const Cint' in the operator function we have not
applied the 'may_alias' attribute to 'const Cint'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66210
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Thanks Daniel, I'm adding a testcase and closing the bug.
We have -finstrument-functions-exclude-function-list=.. in GCC, though
it is not using mangled names.
David
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 10:51:50PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
On 05/21/2015 10:12 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
My
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66210
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66210
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu May 21 22:39:32 2015
New Revision: 223506
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223506root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-05-21 Paolo Carlini
How about adding may_alias support to the code a bit lower down that
copies the abi_tag attribute?
Jason
On 05/21/2015 05:34 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
This would also work, yes. We can set it into something like anonymous.
One problem would be that type_with_linkage_p/type_in_anonymous_namespace_p
would not work on non-C++ types without LTO (because then we do not produce the
type manglings). I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
--- Comment #12 from asmwarrior asmwarrior at gmail dot com ---
Hi, I just did a test on the cygwin 32bit tool chain.
1, download the cygwin installer.
2, install gcc-g++ 4.9.2 and boost 1.57 package
3, run the steps in comment 6, except that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66226
Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #29 from Chung-Kil Hur gil.hur at sf dot snu.ac.kr ---
Dear Richard,
This time, I think I constructed a real bug.
Please have a look and correct me if I am wrong.
=
#include stdio.h
int main() {
int x = 0;
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 07:39:16AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:06:04PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ti_math1.c scan-assembler-times adde 1
It doesn't trigger on big-endian; what is different?
Register dependencies. One of the arguments
Am Thu, 21 May 2015 07:45:19 -0500
schrieb mark maule mark.ma...@oracle.com:
On 5/20/2015 2:13 PM, Martin Uecker wrote:
mark maule mark.ma...@oracle.com:
On 5/20/2015 3:27 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:01 PM, mark maule mark.ma...@oracle.com
wrote:
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66067
James Almer jamrial at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|5.1.0 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #31 from Robbert gcc at robbertkrebbers dot nl ---
[oops, that was meant to be private, please remove my last comment]
My earlier patch to compile stage 1 with -std=c++98 ran into trouble on
FreeBSD, where that flag suppresses declaration of C99 library functions
like strtoull. I was surprised that configure was seeing the
declaration, but discovered that this was because configure was using
the C compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #30 from mail at robbertkrebbers dot nl ---
Hi Gil,
Nice example! I am a bit occupied lately, and thus have not read all
comments at the bug report in detail. I will be away for the weekend,
but will read those quickly after.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66067
--- Comment #2 from James Almer jamrial at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 35594
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35594action=edit
Preprocessed source as generated by -freport-bug, from the second test case
On 05/21/2015 05:54 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Thanks. For me it looks like an inheritance bug. It is really hard
to fix the bug w/o the source code. Could you send me your patch in
order I can debug RA with it to investigate more.
Sure! Here is a patch and a testcase. I applied patch to
||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
||com
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com ---
The problem seems to be fixed in gcc HEAD 6.0.0 20150521 (experimental).
On Thu, 21 May 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Alexander Monakov amona...@ispras.ru
wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 05/21/2015 12:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Done, closing.
On 05/21/2015 12:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr66232-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+/* { dg-do compile { target *-*-linux* } } */
+/* { dg-options -O2 -fpic -fno-plt } */
+
+extern void bar (void);
+
+void
+foo (void)
+{
+ bar ();
+}
+
+/* { dg-final {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu May 21 19:17:28 2015
New Revision: 223500
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223500root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/66233
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65954
Nathan Sidwell nathan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/21/2015 12:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr66232-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+/* { dg-do compile { target *-*-linux* } } */
+/* { dg-options -O2 -fpic -fno-plt } */
+
+extern void bar
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:01 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is the updated patch. It limited memory operand to
GOT slot only. It used a single pattern to cover both call
and sibcall since only GOT slot is allowed.
OK for master if there is no regression?
Thanks.
--
H.J.
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:01 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is the updated patch. It limited memory operand to
GOT slot only. It used a single pattern to cover both call
and sibcall since only GOT slot is
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:34:14AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 05/21/2015 05:39 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Trying 18, 9 - 24:
Failed to match this instruction:
(set (reg:DI 4 4 [+8 ])
(plus:DI (plus:DI (reg:DI 5 5 [ val+8 ])
(reg:DI 76 ca))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37131
Bug 37131 depends on bug 66176, which changed state.
Bug 66176 Summary: Handle conjg() in inline matmul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
What|Removed |Added
On Thu, 21 May 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/21/2015 12:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr66232-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+/* { dg-do compile { target *-*-linux* } } */
+/* { dg-options -O2
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Alexander Monakov amona...@ispras.ru wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/21/2015 12:01 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr66232-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,13
In this PR, we find ourselves instrumenting a static initializer and
then crashing when expanding an unlowered UBSAN_NULL. Jakub suggests
to not instrument DECL_INITIAL of a static variable. The following
patch is an attempt to do that. Note that we're still able to sanitize
similar cases (they
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66176
Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
A program I instrumented to help me debug an otherwise unrelated
problem in 5.1.0 has been crashing in calls to
__builtin_return_address. After checking the manual, I didn't
think I was doing anything wrong. I then did some debugging and
found that the function simply isn't safe to call with
Hi Mikael,
There is little that is specific to conjg (any elemental function would
work roughly the same), but anyway, the patch is OK.
Conjg has the advantage that it is an extremely cheap function -
essentially zero cost.
For an arbitrary elemental function, we would have to think about
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 07:16:06PM +0100, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 04:46:17PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 01:15:22PM +0100, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Indeed, something like this does -not- carry a dependency from the
memory_order_consume load to
||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
||com
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com ---
The problem also occurs in gcc HEAD 6.0.0 20150521 (experimental).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66232
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #2)
Created attachment 35585 [details]
A patch
I am testing this.
It failed this:
[hjl@gnu-6 pr66232]$ cat x.c
extern void (*bar) (void);
void
foo
Hi!
It's just been a year. ;-P
In early March, I (hopefully correctly) adapted Tom's patch to apply to
then-current GCC trunk sources; posting this here. Is the general
approach OK?
On Tue, 20 May 2014 10:16:45 +0200, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
Honza,
Consider this
Hi Julian!
On Tue, 19 May 2015 11:36:58 +0100, Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com
wrote:
This patch fixes an oversight whereby if the CUDA libraries are
available for some reason on a system that doesn't actually contain an
nVidia card, an OpenACC program will raise an error if the NVPTX
On Aarch64, the __sync builtins are implemented using the __atomic operations
and barriers. This makes the the __sync builtins inconsistent with their
documentation which requires stronger barriers than those for the __atomic
builtins.
The difference between __sync and __atomic builtins is that
On Wed, 20 May 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Richard,
this is my attempt to make sense of TYPE_CANONICAL at LTO. My
undrestanding is
that gimple_canonical_types_compatible_p needs to return true for all pairs
of
types that are considered compatible across compilation unit for any of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66241
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66230
--- Comment #11 from gpnuma at centaurean dot com ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #10)
(In reply to gpnuma from comment #8)
Thanks Markus I didn't think these alignment issues were actually the
problem, it goes a long way.
This patch changes the code generated for __sync_type_compare_and_swap to
ldxr reg; cmp; bne label; stlxr; cbnz; label: dmb ish; mov .., reg
This removes the acquire-barrier from the load and ends the operation with a
fence to prevent memory references appearing after the __sync operation
Hi,
this patch drops TYPE_METHOD_BASETYPE from hash_canonical_type. It is not
compared by gimple_canonical_types_compatible_p and thus it can only
corrupt the hashtable by having two entries that are equal but having different
hash.
Theoretically we may want later distinguish the method pointer
On 05/21/2015 03:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Sandra Loosemore
san...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On targets such as ARM, some arches are compatible with options needed to
enable compilation with vectorization, but the specific hardware (or
simulator or BSP)
Hi,
this patch removes call to comp_type_attributes (wich happens for
METHOD_TYPE and FUNCTION_TYPE only). This does not make sense, because
type attributes may change in variants and pointers should be considered
compatible.
We did not get any trouble from this only because we do not really use
On 05/21/2015 03:48 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 21 May 2015 at 07:33, Sandra Loosemore san...@codesourcery.com wrote:
ARM testing shares the AArch64 advsimd-intrinsics execution tests. On ARM,
though, the NEON support being tested is optional -- some arches are
compatible with the NEON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65446
Eric Blake eblake at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eblake at redhat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66089
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vehre from comment #7)
Ah, ok, which opens the question why that isn't done?
Performance, for (very) big arrays.
On 19/05/15 20:20, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Mon, 2015-05-18 at 17:36 +0100, Matthew Wahab wrote:
Hello,
On 15/05/15 17:22, Torvald Riegel wrote:
This patch improves the documentation of the built-ins for atomic
operations.
The memory model to memory order change does improve things but I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61683
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Patch here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01948.html
On May 21, 2015 5:28:14 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
We ICE on the following testcase at -O3 on x86_64-linux, because
gimple folding attempts to simplify FLOAT_EXPR conversion of
signed V4SI to V4SF feeding FIX_TRUNC_EXPR to unsigned V4SI
into a FIX_TRUNC_EXPR with
This patch adds tests for the code generated by the Aarch64 backend for the
__sync builtins.
Tested aarch64-none-linux-gnu with check-gcc.
Ok for trunk?
Matthew
gcc/testsuite/
2015-05-21 Matthew Wahab matthew.wa...@arm.com
* gcc.target/aarch64/sync-comp-swap.c: New.
*
I tested this patch and it passes bootstrap and no extra failures.
Thanks
-Aditya
Symbolically evaluate conditionals, and subtraction when additional constraints
are provided.
Adding this evaluation mechanism helps vectorize some loops on 64bit machines
because on 64bit, a typecast appears
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59093
Matt Thompson matthew.thompson at nasa dot gov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.9.1 |5.1.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66247
Bug ID: 66247
Summary: make check-gmp fails for gcc-5.1.0
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
This patch add -mtls-size option for AArch64. This option let user to do
finer control on code generation for various TLS model on AArch64.
For example, for TLS LE, user can specify smaller tls-size, for example
4K which is quite usual, to let AArch64 backend generate more efficient
instruction
Hi!
I've committed another testcase, which tests the computation of
number of iterations for each task and number of tasks.
2015-05-21 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
* testsuite/libgomp.c/taskloop-4.c: New test.
--- libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/taskloop-4.c(revision 0)
+++
4 instruction sequences can be implemented for AArch64 TLS LE model
based on relocations provided.
These instruction sequences are the same for tiny/small/large, We just
need to choose the most efficient one to use accoding to tls size.
the 12bit version give us 4K TLS size, 24bit give us 16M,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66239
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
This patch needs to update tm.texi.in and regenerate tm.texi to describe
the new semantics of STACK_GROWS_DOWNWARD.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
201 - 300 of 325 matches
Mail list logo
