On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:44 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com wrote:
What is right way to fix these? I saw one testcase that did
typedef int int32_t __attribute__ ((__mode__ (__SI__)));
Is this
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Steve Ellcey sell...@imgtec.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-04-25 at 09:53 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
We have gimple_duplicate_sese_region for this. It may be not perfect though.
Eventually it should be changed to handle SEME regions as well and all
loop copying /
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:03:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:44 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com wrote:
What is right way to fix these? I saw one testcase that did
Hi,
I'm MSc High-Performance Computing student at Polytechnic University
of Catalonia(BarcelonaTech). I'm interesting openmp task scheduling
optimization or openmp 3.1 facility taskyield.
@For Task scheduling
I'm using mercurium compiler already at my university because the
compiler was
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:03:43AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:44 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
Hi,
I think that I have found a bug in gcc home page gcc-4.7 changes.
In C++ paragraph about explicit override control.
In example code, is it really struct, not class?
BR,
Jurgis
On 26 April 2013 13:09, Jurgis Upenieks wrote:
Hi,
I think that I have found a bug in gcc home page gcc-4.7 changes.
In C++ paragraph about explicit override control.
In example code, is it really struct, not class?
Yes, that's valid C++, the example is fine.
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
The test scanning for * 4 would not be fixed with int32plus indeed (if
int is larger than 32bits). Using int32_t would be better than
SImode as SImode is not guaranteed to be 32bits either.
SImode should (if it exists) always be four times QImode,
The What's New in 4.8 document links to the X86 Built-in Functions
section of the online manual, but its link is dead.
The working link is:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/X86-Built_002din-Functions.html#X86-Built_002din-Functions
Note the _002d rather than a -.
Presumably a side effect
This is the beta release of binutils 2.23.52.0.2 for Linux, which is
based on binutils 2013 0423 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various
changes. It is purely for Linux.
All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree.
You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57056
Ondrej Bilka neleai at seznam dot cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29930|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57064
--- Comment #14 from Thiago Macieira thiago at kde dot org 2013-04-26
06:16:04 UTC ---
Understood. The idea is that one would write:
QString str = QString(%1 %2).arg(42).arg(43);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57071
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57073
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57071
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
07:07:22 UTC ---
As James Van Buskirk pointed out, the algorithm will fail if k 0. Thus, he
suggests, which gives the expected result:
1 - ISHFT(IAND(K,1),1)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57073
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57071
--- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2013-04-26 07:12:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
As James Van Buskirk pointed out, the algorithm will fail if k 0.
note that in the case of k being a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57071
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
07:26:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
1 - ISHFT(IAND(K,1),1)
For the real version Jakub suspects that (k 1) ? -1.0 : 1.0 is faster than
the mod/convert to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57079
Bug #: 57079
Summary: [Fortran-dev] version/type/attribute fields not set
with CLASS components
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: fortran-dev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57079
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57077
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43847
Joern Clausen joern.clau...@uni-bielefeld.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57064
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
08:12:36 UTC ---
That will also work if you return an rvalue, not an rvalue reference, and will
be safe against accidental misuse.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
09:00:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 29944
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29944
gcc49-pr56866.patch
The fix for gcc.c-torture/execute/pr51581* and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57071
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
09:16:41 UTC ---
Note that for the (-1.0)**k case __builtin_powif (-1.0e+0, k) should be
perfectly fine for the middle-end. _gfortran_pow_i4_i4 (-1, k) is of
course
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57038
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška marxin.liska at gmail dot com 2013-04-26
09:23:58 UTC ---
So the symbol is really external :
c++filt:
std::_Tuple_impl0ul, int const::_Tuple_impl()
dump_symbol_node:
_ZNSt11_Tuple_implILm0EIRKiEEC1Ev/279814
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57076
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org 2013-04-26 10:15:31
UTC ---
The rule to generate gcc-vers.texi needs to replace @ by @@ when writing out
the definition of srcdir.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
Bug #: 57080
Summary: Invalid optimization (-O2) when doing double - int
conversion (on big endian archs(?))
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
--- Comment #1 from Ondřej Surý ondrej at sury dot org 2013-04-26 10:27:30
UTC ---
Created attachment 29945
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29945
Generated from gd.c, affected code is in clip_1d function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55708
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-04-26 10:37:55 UTC ---
gcc 4.9.0 20130421 (experimental) accepts the code on my system (64-bit mingw).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
10:54:45 UTC ---
Ok, I think I reduced this issue to this:
/* PR tree-optimization/57075 */
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options -O2 } */
extern int baz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
--- Comment #2 from Ondřej Surý ondrej at sury dot org 2013-04-26 11:04:19
UTC ---
Maybe I should have said inconsistent and this might be related to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27394
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
11:23:13 UTC ---
b.c: In function ‘bar’:
b.c:17:1: error: control flow in the middle of basic block 2
bb 2:
_5 = __builtin_printf ($);
D.1727 = _5;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
11:25:38 UTC ---
Ok, that's because printf is considered a possible caller of longjmp but
inlining doesn't split the block before handling the return.
We need to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
11:34:35 UTC ---
Generally fixup_cfg () is used for this kind of needed adjustments.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: antoine.balest...@gmail.com
Using GCC 4.9.0 as of 20130426 :
$ cat seg.c
int a;
void f(void)
{
int b;
if(0)
lbl:
goto lbl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2013-04-26
11:49:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 29946
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29946
test case
I can reproduce the issue on m68k: with the attached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54648
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55708
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-04-26
11:52:30 UTC ---
Thanks Daniel. I'm going to add the testcase and close the PR as fixed for
4.9.0.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43745
Côme David d.come at isae dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d.come at isae dot fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57081
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57081
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
12:00:08 UTC ---
Happens via max_loop_iterations called from finite_loop_p called from DCE.
It expects loop_optimizer_finalize to free them - which is probably a
good
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
12:03:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Ok, that's because printf is considered a possible caller of longjmp but
inlining doesn't split the block before handling
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56866
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29944|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2013-04-26 12:11:07 UTC ---
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57075
--- Comment #7 from Marek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55708
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732
gretay at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gretay at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
--- Comment #4 from Ondřej Surý ondrej at sury dot org 2013-04-26 12:32:20
UTC ---
Yeah, I just came to same conclusion by reading further (PR9325), that it's not
related to PR27394, because we are not hitting the boundaries of the conversion
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57003
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57051
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57045
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57064
--- Comment #16 from Thiago Macieira thiago at kde dot org 2013-04-26
13:45:35 UTC ---
Thanks for the hint.
However, returning an rvalue, even if moved-onto, will generate code for the
destructor. It's not a matter of efficiency, just of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57082
Bug #: 57082
Summary: brace initialization requires public destructor
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57083
Bug #: 57083
Summary: Wrong constant folding
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
14:23:27 UTC ---
Well, you aren't using spurious, are you? Because t + spurious... expands to
nothing.
If mark_exp_read isn't called while processing_template_decl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56958
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-04-26
14:30:29 UTC ---
I agree, looks like warning is fine...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57083
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57084
Bug #: 57084
Summary: 483. xalancbmk run fails with -O2 -flto for i686
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56949
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56450
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
Ondřej Surý ondrej at sury dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Ondřej Surý ondrej at sury dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ondrej at sury dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56450
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26
16:11:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
I swear I have read the (non) bugs section before reporting the bug. Anyway
it's do damn confusing that the result can be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57083
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56535
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-04-26
17:25:27 UTC ---
The test gfortran.dg/class_array_3.f03 has started to give the same ICE when
compiled -fsanitize=address for a revision between 195931
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57003
--- Comment #22 from Kirill Smirnov kirill.k.smirnov at math dot spbu.ru
2013-04-26 17:50:07 UTC ---
Confirming: the attached patch fixes the problem with wine.
Thank you!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57018
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.2,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57046
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.2,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56903
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56847
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regression]|[4.8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56746
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56742
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57085
Bug #: 57085
Summary: Segmentation Fault when building a c file
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56955
davidxl at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davidxl at google dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56814
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26 19:31:41 UTC ---
Fixed on the 4.8 branch with:
Author: janus
Date: Fri Apr 26 19:20:55 2013
New Revision: 198345
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198345root=gccview=rev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57022
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-26 19:35:31 UTC ---
Fixed on the 4.8 branch with:
Author: janus
Date: Fri Apr 26 19:20:55 2013
New Revision: 198345
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=198345root=gccview=rev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57086
Bug #: 57086
Summary: Internal compiler error: Error reporting routines
re-entered.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57086
--- Comment #1 from madars+gccbug at gmail dot com 2013-04-26 20:48:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 29949
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29949
triggering code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57087
Bug #: 57087
Summary: make failed: libmpfr not found or uses a different
ABI
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57086
--- Comment #2 from madars+gccbug at gmail dot com 2013-04-26 21:20:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 29951
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29951
pre-processed source file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56968
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57022
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56953
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-04-26
22:37:20 UTC ---
Yes, and the released 4.8.0 and current 4_8-branch also works for me. I think
we can close the issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57086
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53685
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57088
Bug #: 57088
Summary: Post-reload instruction splitting clobbers live
register
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57088
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57088
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54349
--- Comment #4 from Ondrej Bilka neleai at seznam dot cz 2013-04-27 01:06:45
UTC ---
I found that AMD Bulldozer optimization guide states that moves from xmm to
GPR register should be done directly:
10.4 Moving Data Between
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
This patch adds folding of constant arguments v and v, which helps to
optimize the testcase from the PR back into constant store after vectorized
loop is unrolled.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
Ok.
On Fri, 26 Apr 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
Bootstrap currently fails in libgo, there are false positive warnings
that ({anonymous}) is uninitialized in multiple places.
The testcase below reproduces this issue too. The problem is
that the ab edges to setjmp call are added
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 04:19:20PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
This is the patch that I consider final as a first step (to avoid
changing too much at once). I've analyzed the few failures
and compared to the previous patch changed the
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
