raja.sal...@iap-online.com writes:
Is there a way to make the instruction has to allocate to run without
using the scheduler for particular instruction ?
I don't understand the question.
The target we are using supports parallel instruction execution, Max 7.
For one cycle, one instruction
Brian O'Mahoney o...@teraflex-bp.dyndns.org writes:
Two quick questions:
This message might have been better sent to gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org.
Please consider taking any followups there. Thanks.
(1) Is the feature roadmap for 4.5, 4.6 ... published anywhere
No. We're not that formal. Likely
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 12:15 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.3.3 has been released.
GCC 4.3.3 is a bug-fix release containing fixes for regressions and
serious bugs in GCC 4.3.2. This release is available from the
FTP servers listed at:
Hi, Im sorry that this is not 100% specific to gcc, however this
mailing list is the last place where I think this knowledge may lie. I
have written some image processing routines in assembly language
making extensive use of MMX, and now I want to start optimizing it,
however I cant for the life
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 12:15 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.3.3 has been released.
GCC 4.3.3 is a bug-fix release containing fixes for regressions and
serious bugs in GCC 4.3.2. This release is available from the
FTP servers listed at:
On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 10:52 -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 12:15 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.3.3 has been released.
GCC 4.3.3 is a bug-fix release containing fixes for regressions and
serious bugs in GCC 4.3.2. This release is
Hi Sir/Mam,
I installed the gcc and other softwares wlth .tar extension. We
have to do a step by step procedure while installing the sofware which have
.tar extension.
1) First, we have to unzip the file and give ./configure
2) Second, we have to give
rkarthi2k5 wrote:
Hi Sir/Mam,
Do not post this to the gcc list, which is for the development of gcc.
I answered your question on the gcc-help list.
Andrew.
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 11:44 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
We like to update x86-64 psABI to pass aggregates of 32 bytes with
single __m256 field
in AVX registers, instead of memory. However, finding the proper
wording seems tricky.
Here is what I got. Any comments?
Here is
Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
Obviously, a library is not enough for a heterogeneous system, or
am I missing anything from your description? As I know, e.g. there is
no device-independent bytecode in the OpenCL standard which such a
backend could generate.
That's correct. I was envisioning a
I am always a very careful with the 32-bit Sparc build because I often end
up with a 32-bit gcc but the ABI says SPARC V8PLUS or some such.
On Solaris. Things are quite different on Linux and other OSes.
# /opt/build/GCC/gcc-4.3.3-build/prev-gcc/xgcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target:
On Feb 3, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
Obviously, a library is not enough for a heterogeneous system, or
am I missing anything from your description? As I know, e.g. there
is
no device-independent bytecode in the OpenCL standard which such a
backend
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Feb 3, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
Obviously, a library is not enough for a heterogeneous system, or
am I missing anything from your description? As I know, e.g. there is
no device-independent
Dennis Clarke:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 converted... ]
I'll try sparc64, powerpc64 and ia64 when the machines are available.
I can probably help you with the Sparc64 requirement. To be precise, do
you need Sun UltraSparc or are you looking for the multicore SPARC64
processor which is a (
On an (possibly) off-topic note, it seems that gmp requires GNU ld, but GCC
needs the native ld.
Neither is supposed to be true (and I've built GMP with Sun ld and GCC with
GNU ld many times).
--
Eric Botcazou
On an (possibly) off-topic note, it seems that gmp requires GNU ld, but GCC
needs the native ld.
Neither is supposed to be true (and I've built GMP with Sun ld and GCC with
GNU ld many times).
I didn't take notes, and you wouldn't find my configuration very
useful (much symlinking to the
Rather than invent a new quoting syntax, why not just split the
arguments up? If each a plugin has a name, you could use that name in
subsequent -f arguments. E.g., if the name of the plugin in
plugin.so is foo, perhaps:
-fplugin=/path/to/plugin.so -ffoo-arg1=value1 -ffoo-arg2=value2
The
Mark Mitchell writes:
That's correct. I was envisioning a proper compiler that would take
OpenCL input and generate binary output, for a particular target, just
as with all other GCC input languages. That target might be a GPU, or
it might be a multi-core CPU, or it might be a single-core CPU.
Ross Ridge wrote:
Mark Mitchell writes:
That's correct. I was envisioning a proper compiler that would take
OpenCL input and generate binary output, for a particular target, just
as with all other GCC input languages. That target might be a GPU, or
it might be a multi-core CPU, or it might
Dear gcc.gnu.org
I mirrored the ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc to
http://robotlab.itk.ppke.hu/gcc
country: Hungary
city: Budapest
contact:
name: Adam Rak (Ádám Rák)
e-mail: neur...@gmail.com
The mirror is updated daily. I can configure it to be more frequent if
you require.
Best wishes:
Ádám Rák
Basile STARYNKEVITCH writes:
It seems to me that some specifications
seems to be available. I am not a GPU expert, but
http://developer.amd.com/documentation/guides/Pages/default.aspx
contains a R8xx Family Instruction Set Archictectire document at
http://developer.amd.com/gpu_assets/r600isa.pdf
2009/2/3 Sean Callanan spy...@cs.sunysb.edu:
--
-Wl,option
Pass option as an option to the linker. If option contains
commas,
it is split into multiple options at the commas.
--
So perhaps we could do something like
--
-Wplugin-$NAME,arg=value
I apologise if this
Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Hi Mark,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39076 appears to be an
reappearance of the failure reported originally at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01577.html . and detailed
discussion in the thread that ends at
Ross Ridge wrote:
Basile STARYNKEVITCH writes:
It seems to me that some specifications
seems to be available. I am not a GPU expert, but
http://developer.amd.com/documentation/guides/Pages/default.aspx
contains a R8xx Family Instruction Set Archictectire document at
Ross Ridge wrote:
Oh, ok, that makes a world of difference. Even with just AMD GPU
support a GCC-based OpenCL implementation becomes a lot more practical.
Michael Meissner writes:
And bear in mind that x86's with GPUs are not the only platform of interest
I never said anything about x86's and
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 04:06, Sean Callanan spy...@cs.sunysb.edu wrote:
We also have a magic argument called FILE that lets you load arguments from
a file.
That's what @ arguments are for. Which argues for not concatenating arguments.
Would it be a problem to do
-plugin=myplugin
Sean == Sean Callanan spy...@cs.sunysb.edu writes:
(3) The -fplugin-arg argument is one way to do arguments. We do it as
-ftree-plugin=/path/to/plugin.so:arg=value:arg=value:...
Benjamin I'm a little worried about the colon separator. Windows file
Benjamin paths may legally have colons. Is
Hi Mark,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39076 appears to be an
reappearance of the failure reported originally at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01577.html . and detailed
discussion in the thread that ends at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-06/msg00907.html .
Is
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Michael Meissner
meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
And bear in mind that x86's with GPUs are not the only platform of interest.
Even x86 with the SPRUS engine is a platform of interest for some
companies (not me but you get the idea).
-- Pinski
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Ross Ridge wrote:
Mark Mitchell writes:
That's correct. I was envisioning a proper compiler that would take
OpenCL input and generate binary output, for a particular target, just
as with all other GCC input languages. That target might be a GPU, or
it might be a
On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 04:37:55PM -0500, Ross Ridge wrote:
Basile STARYNKEVITCH writes:
It seems to me that some specifications
seems to be available. I am not a GPU expert, but
http://developer.amd.com/documentation/guides/Pages/default.aspx
contains a R8xx Family Instruction Set
On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 09:40:20AM -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:
On Feb 3, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
Obviously, a library is not enough for a heterogeneous system, or
am I missing anything from your description? As I know, e.g. there
is
no
Hi,
Can anybody explain about the unspec_volatile() rtl template usage, sample
example and the purpose of it.
Thanks and Regards
Raja Saleru
Hi,
I am using the gcc version 3.4.6. It is cross built for one of the ARM
based target. I would like to build the gcc in debug mode and step by step
debug the code.
The gcc/configure has -g -O2 option. but if I run through debugger, the
source files of the entire gcc are not visible.
somebody
raja.sal...@iap-online.com writes:
Can anybody explain about the unspec_volatile() rtl template usage, sample
example and the purpose of it.
unspec_volatile is documented in the gcc internals manual. There are
many examples of using it in the existing gcc backends. The purpose
is to permit
--- Comment #7 from cnstar9988 at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 08:43 ---
4.3.3 on Linux has the same problem.
Target Milestone: 4.3.3?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35923
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 08:55 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I would have said that the value of the integer component after the first
assignment is, at best, ill-defined. If L_TO_T assigns a value to it, gfortran
gives the same result as any other
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 09:08 ---
The testcase lays the way to proof that whatever PTA ends up putting in
the ESCAPED solution (which includes all globals) TBAA disambiguation
on these is invalid. This basically means that TBAA is nearly useless,
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 09:17 ---
Yes, but as the store to y is via *x and x points to { ANYTHING } (via the
non-pointer (int ***)q) only (as x already includes ANYTHING we do not add
a for the second constraint), so for *x = i we fail to add a to
--- Comment #10 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 09:45 ---
How is it now?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #10 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 09:47 ---
Can you try the patch of PR38824?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 09:49 ---
What about canonicalizing to a *positive* number?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 10:06 ---
Similarly
__typeof (0r)
foo (void)
{
return 0r;
}
ICEs on x86-64 and so does
_Fract foo (void)
{
return 0r;
}
(the last one just as error-recovery ICE). I'd say for
!targetm.fixed_point_supported_p () we should
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 09:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=17230)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17230action=view)
unincluded testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39077
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 10:52 ---
libjava testsuite works OK on 4.3.4 branch for hppa-linux-gnu [1] and alpha
[2].
The remaining java failures on alpha are due to testsuite problem (dg ?/ expect
?/tcl ?), described in PR 33263.
[1]
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 11:04 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Note: ada on alpha bootstrap fine on trunk.
And on 4.3 branch [1]:
[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-02/msg00280.html
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 11:11 ---
caused by r90059 (convert_nontype_argument rewrite). Giovanni, do you have
time to see if the patch I made makes sense?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 11:17 ---
What if we forbid altogether memory operands and we *synthesize* them with a
peephole2? Anyway, it seems safe to me to declare this a dup of PR38824?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 11:18 ---
Can someone check if this still fails on latest 4.3 branch?
4.4 works OK.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 11:10 ---
Not a GCC bug.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #8 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 12:24 ---
Current trunk produces:
f:
.frame $30,0,$26,0
.prologue 0
and $16,4,$3
lda $6,64($31)
bis $31,$31,$2
cmpult $31,$3,$3
beq $3,$L3
stl $31,0($16)
lda
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 12:25 ---
Together with the patch for PR 8603:
f:
.frame $30,0,$26,0
.prologue 0
and $16,4,$4
lda $1,64($31)
bis $31,$31,$2
cmpult $31,$4,$4
beq $4,$L3
stl $31,0($16)
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 12:31 ---
By changing the test to:
--cut here--
unsigned int p[64];
int f(void) {
for (int i = 0; i 64; ++i)
p[i] = 0;
}
--cut here--
gcc -O2 -ftree-vectorize -mcpu=ev67 -std=c99
f:
.frame $30,0,$26,0
--- Comment #18 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-02-03 13:16
---
(In reply to comment #17)
+ if (TREE_CODE (t1) == TYPENAME_TYPE)
+t1 = resolve_typename_type (t2, /*only_current_p=*/true);
But I suppose you want consistently t1 here ;)
--
--- Comment #11 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 10:36 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Can you try the patch of PR38824?
I have tried with a similar peephole2 recognizer. The problem is, that there is
no spare x register to allocate as a temporary, so peephole2 is ineffective
in
--- Comment #2 from kkojima at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 13:31 ---
It seems that the move insn in problem is generated when reloading
but has no insn definition matched.
The patch
--- ORIG/trunk/gcc/config/sh/predicates.md 2008-04-05 09:19:14.0
+0900
+++
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 10:20 ---
Subject: Bug 38049
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 3 10:20:20 2009
New Revision: 143890
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=143890
Log:
2009-02-03 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
--- Comment #6 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 13:58 ---
News?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37437
--- Comment #2 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 14:00 ---
Is this a regression? I don't see anything in the patches or in their
description that would prevent a backport to 4.4.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #34 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 14:02 ---
Is this still a 4.4 regression?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 14:23 ---
Adjusting subject, the testcase from comment #2 still produces suboptimal code.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-02-03 14:24 ---
Subject: Re: PTA constraint processing for *x
= y is wrong
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, dberlin at dberlin dot org wrote:
Subject: Re: PTA constraint processing for *x =
y is wrong
There used to be a *ANYTHING =
--- Comment #14 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 14:30 ---
what remains is a dup of 22141.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 22141 ***
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 14:30 ---
*** Bug 37135 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39084
--- Comment #11 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2009-02-03 14:48 ---
I have a patch (a new spill heuristic) which makes facerec even faster with IRA
on power6. The patch is in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-11/msg00368.html
Unfortunately the new spill heuristic results in
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 14:56 ---
Maybe we can approach the problem from the other side, for example marking I/O
functions as cold, or marking I/O functions as cold so that
PRED_FLAG_FIRST_MATCH hits in predict.def?
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
On an Arm9 processor running Debian the following program gives the results
indicated...
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
#include math.h
int main()
{
double in, out;
in = 2.0;
out = sqrt(in);
printf(%f\n, out); // 2.
printf(%f\n, sqrt(in)); // 1.414214
printf(%f\n, sqrt(2.0));
--- Comment #7 from vmakarov at redhat dot com 2009-02-03 15:06 ---
I don't see anymore code difference (only a bit different hard registers are
used) on mentioned functions for code generated with the old RA and IRA.
Probably it was fixed with a fix in regmove which was submitted as a
When compiling test 27_io/basic_istream/requirements/explicit_instantiation.cc
from the libstc++ testsuite and adding the -fno-tree-sra flag, I get
the following error:
--
--- Comment #1 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=17232)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17232action=view)
Preprocessed source
Enough to compile with -O2 -g -fno-tree-sra explicit_instantiation.ii
--
--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:09 ---
Great.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #11 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:15 ---
No, the patch does not fix it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37889
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:19 ---
But at least it gets cc1 to call rtx_addr_can_trap_p_1. Mine
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:30 ---
Not too useful, that preprocessed source includes PCHs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39086
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #3 from tony_eckert at umsl dot edu 2009-02-03 15:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=17233)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17233action=view)
autoconf log of failed stage 3 build
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39083
I have noticed that in some cases - especially calculating Mandelbrot Fractals
there is a severe performance penalty if the COMPLEX data type is used instead
of plain variables.
It's nothing wrong with the calculation, but it shall be noted that it can mean
a severe performance penalty if the
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 3, 2009, at 5:56 AM, bonzini at gnu dot org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
--- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 13:56
---
ping?
The patch was just approved last night and I will be applying it when
I get into work today.
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2009-02-03 15:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression] Incorrect type diagnostic on substracting
casted char pointers
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 3, 2009, at 5:56 AM, bonzini at gnu dot org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
---
--- Comment #13 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=17235)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17235action=view)
patch to be tested
The patch fixes the bug. As a follow up (see PR38921 audit trail)
MTP_AFTER_MOVE and
--- Comment #2 from m4341 at abc dot se 2009-02-03 15:50 ---
Notice that the test cases have been executed on a Pentium III computer with
dual 866MHz processors.
The 'depth' variable in the example code has been set to produce comfortable
execution times for the forementioned computer.
Following emits a warning about potential use of uninitialized variable,
even though the variable initialization and it's use are guarded by the
same predicate.
int f (void);
int g (int a)
{
int b;
if (a) b = f ();
asm volatile (#);
if (a) return b;
return 1;
}
$ gcc -O
--- Comment #6 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:56 ---
Subject: Bug 36897
Author: bonzini
Date: Tue Feb 3 15:56:05 2009
New Revision: 143896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=143896
Log:
gcc/cp:
2009-02-03 Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #20 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 15:56 ---
Subject: Bug 37314
Author: bonzini
Date: Tue Feb 3 15:56:05 2009
New Revision: 143896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=143896
Log:
gcc/cp:
2009-02-03 Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #3 from s dot neumann at phase-zero dot de 2009-02-03 16:14
---
The code in flac that triggered the problem does also make gcc crash with -O3
-funroll-loops. I've also tested -O1 and -O2, same problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39076
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:15 ---
Use -ffast-math.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39087
--- Comment #32 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:16 ---
The patch for partial memory writes was committed.
How are we doing on this benchmark now?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23322
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23322
--- Comment #7 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:20 ---
fixed on 4.3/4.4, still needs backporting to 4.2
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:21 ---
fixed on 4.3/4.4, still needs backporting to 4.2
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-02-03 16:22
---
Did you really commit it to mainline? I don't see it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36897
--- Comment #22 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-02-03 16:22
---
Likewise... ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37314
--- Comment #12 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:25 ---
When generating 64-bit code we produce good induction variables either with or
without ivopts, but with an extra mov.
For 32-bit code the situation is the same as reported originally.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:26 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE with function pointer
template parameter
Did you really commit it to mainline? I don't see it.
I was doing it. :-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36897
--- Comment #9 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:26 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE with function pointer
template parameter
Did you really commit it to mainline? I don't see it.
I was doing it. :-)
--- Comment #10 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03
--- Comment #23 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:26 ---
Subject: Bug 37314
Author: bonzini
Date: Tue Feb 3 16:26:28 2009
New Revision: 143898
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=143898
Log:
gcc/cp:
2009-02-03 Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-02-03 16:28 ---
changing summary, inlining _is_ the right thing to do.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |paolo dot carlini at oracle
|dot org
1 - 100 of 183 matches
Mail list logo
