On 22/07/14 16:23, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On 22/07/14 14:14, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
In the arm backend we've got this TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM macro that is
currently on for TARGET_THUMB2 with a comment that says:
/* We could use unified syntax for arm mode, but for now we just use
On 23/07/14 09:55, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 22/07/14 16:23, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On 22/07/14 14:14, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
In the arm backend we've got this TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM macro that is
currently on for TARGET_THUMB2 with a comment that says:
/* We could use unified
On 23/07/14 09:59, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 23/07/14 09:55, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 22/07/14 16:23, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On 22/07/14 14:14, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
In the arm backend we've got this TARGET_UNIFIED_ASM macro that is
currently on for TARGET_THUMB2 with a
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Segher Boessenkool
seg...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 08:44:41AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
So why
not just stick to the current scheme and have 5.0.0, 5.0.1, 5.0.2 etc.?
Yes, why would we use a different numbering scheme now?
On 07/20/2014 06:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 05:59:08PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
I understood we agreed on 5.0 and further 5.1, 5.2 releases from the
branch and 6.0 a year later. With unspecified uses for the patch level
number (so leave it at zero).
Ian/Jason, is
Hi,
thanks for all your help. I have contact ass...@gnu.org now. Still waiting for
a reply though.
- Andre
--
Andre Vehreschild
C is popular as intermediate language. This means that some compilers
generate C and use a C compiler as backend. Wikipedia lists several
languages, which use C as intermediate language:
Eiffel, Sather, Esterel, some dialects of Lisp (Lush, Gambit),
Haskell (Glasgow Haskell Compiler), Squeak's
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/20/2014 06:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 05:59:08PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
I understood we agreed on 5.0 and further 5.1, 5.2 releases from the
branch and 6.0 a year later. With
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com writes:
At the same time, we face the fact that going from 4.9 to 4.10 will
break some people's existing scripts, as is also true of any other
decision we can make.
Looking forward to gcc 10.0. :-)
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key
On Jul 23, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com writes:
At the same time, we face the fact that going from 4.9 to 4.10 will
break some people's existing scripts, as is also true of any other
decision we can make.
Looking
I believe that sometimes gcc is promoting the ints to long longs when
doing the overflow testing. If I try to overflow a long long, I get the
trap as expected.
See also https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19020
dw
On 7/23/2014 7:56 AM, Thomas Mertes wrote:
C is popular as
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 09:20:23AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I think that if anybody has strong objections, now is the time to make
them. Otherwise I think we should go with this plan.
My preference was to keep the current versioning scheme, after all, even
right now it is IMHO worthwhile
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, David Wohlferd wrote:
I have been looking at asm_fprintf in final.c, and I think there's a design
flaw. But since the change affects ARM and since I have no access to an ARM
system, I need a second opinion.
There's this thing called cross-compilation, which happens for
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20140723 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20140723/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
I didn't see a place to post slides for Cauldron talks, so am posting
links to them here.
Just-In-Time compilation using GCC (libgccjit.so)
===
HTML slides:
http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/presentations/cauldron-2014/jit/
Source code used for
Not that the following would constitute the actual testing
usually required for a patch, but:
/path/to/toplevel/configure --target=arm-eabi make all-gcc
# Yay, the compiler-proper for a bare iron ARM compiler.
./gcc/xgcc -B./gcc -S test.c
Woot, compiled your first ARM program. :) Just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61884
Bug ID: 61884
Summary: [4.10 Regression] g++.dg/ipa/pr61085.C FAILs with -Os
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61085
--- Comment #10 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
Can you open a new bug for that?
Opened PR61884 for that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61881
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Draft patch:
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
@@ -591,4 +591,10 @@ gfc_conv_intrinsic_to_class (gfc_se *parmse, gfc_expr *e,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61881
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The draft patch does not fully work:
a) class._data = desc assignment is missing
tmp = gfc_build_addr_expr (NULL_TREE, tmp);
plus the moved gfc_add_modify works in the scalar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61071
--- Comment #1 from Krzysztof Kundzicz athantor+gccbugzilla at athi dot pl ---
Same with gcc 4.9.1 + gdb 7.7.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61320
--- Comment #56 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #55)
On July 17, 2014 6:13:14 PM CEST, thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61885
Bug ID: 61885
Summary: [4.10 Regression] ICE: in types_same_for_odr, at
ipa-devirt.c:383 with LTO
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61861
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
Bug ID: 61886
Summary: [4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression] LTO breaks fread with
_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Btw, it seems that at the point we merge in lto-symtab.c the cgraph nodes are
not yet populated. Neither of the two candidates are marked as alias.
So maybe the wrong thing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61884
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61887
Bug ID: 61887
Summary: vect.exp UNRESOLVED tests
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61887
--- Comment #1 from Marat Zakirov m.zakirov at samsung dot com ---
This issue is suitible for ARM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61861
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
It looks like a pretty old issue. E.g. on
void
foo (void)
{
__FILE__;
foo;
}
4.8 says:
r.c: In function ‘foo’:
r.c:4:1: warning: statement with no effect [-Wunused-value]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fails LTO bootstrap with
/abuild/rguenther/obj/./prev-gcc/xg++ -B/abuild/rguenther/obj/./prev-gcc/
-B/usr/local/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -nostdinc++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61885
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61884
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61887
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61876
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61846
--- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek at in dot waw.pl ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
C99 also has this requirement. But C89 did not.
The warnings are best effort anyway. So even if the standards did *not* say
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61872
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61872
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61872
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Old value = 12 '\f'
New value = 16 '\020'
init_adjust_machine_modes () at insn-modes.c:1069
1066 /* config/i386/i386-modes.def:34 */
1067 s = TARGET_128BIT_LONG_DOUBLE ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61870
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61867
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61853
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61842
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61839
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61876
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ktkachov at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fully preprocessed glibc fread stuff (reduced testcase drops main path
and a prototype for __fread_chk):
extern size_t __fread_chk (void *__restrict __ptr, size_t __ptrlen,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61888
Bug ID: 61888
Summary: Wrong results with SIZEOF and assumed-rank arrays
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid, wrong-code
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61832
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61886
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61396
Segher Boessenkool segher at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
Bug ID: 61889
Summary: [4.10 Regression] gcov-tool.c uses nftw, ftw.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61889
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61685
--- Comment #1 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Jul 23 14:27:55 2014
New Revision: 212942
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212942root=gccview=rev
Log:
Remove redundant tests
PR libgcc/61685
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61685
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=61889
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55701
--- Comment #4 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: amker
Date: Wed Jul 23 16:02:15 2014
New Revision: 212948
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=212948root=gccview=rev
Log:
Revert r212893:
PR target/55701
* config/arm/arm.md
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61802
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 33177
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33177action=edit
Proposed patch
I guess the problem is that error_mark_node is special cased in varasm to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61667
François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61890
Bug ID: 61890
Summary: [4.10 Regression] g++.dg/ipa/devirt-23.C FAILs with
-O2 -fno-devirtualize-speculatively
-fno-guess-branch-probability
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42857
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Ayer bugs at mm dot beanwood.com ---
Any word on if this will be fixed in GCC? To summarize, GCC's current behavior
is wrong because:
* Underflowing after ignoring the requested number of bytes could block
forever,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61396
--- Comment #7 from Mike Stump mikestump at comcast dot net ---
So when you compose the svn comments, compose them from a cut and paste of sed
20q ChangeLog, exactly. In this case, you did this:
rs6000: fix for PR61396 (wide-int fallout)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61891
Bug ID: 61891
Summary: line-map.c: file command-line left but not entered
during `cabal install -p haskell-src-exts`
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61892
Bug ID: 61892
Summary: RVO not occurs with constructor with universal
reference arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
The below patch adds a new preprocessor define for the device name
(__AVR_DEVICE_NAME__) that was passed to the compiler.
While the device name macro (say __AVR_ATmega128__) can be used to
check for a specific device, there is no way right now for code
to get the device name it is being
Darn, had forgotten to attach the patch...
On 16/07/14 12:30, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
This fixes the PR mentioned in the subject. When expanding
atomic_test_and_set we try the corresponding sync optabs and if none
exist, like for pre-SMP ARM architectures (-march=armv6 and earlier) the
Ping.
On 16/07/14 10:46, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 16/07/14 09:25, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 09:05:22AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed we don't document the clrsbmode2 optab but it does exist.
The proposed description is based on the clrsb RTL code
On 07/22/2014 07:17 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2014, Alexander Monakov wrote:
I'd like to push this topic forward a bit. I've bootstrapped and regtested a
version of the patch based on the initial proposal to check DECL_WEAK. The
approach with decl_replaceable_p looks not
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
I don't see why
long x[1024];
Q *q = new (x) Q;
q-~Q ();
new (x) T;
would be invalid. I also don't see why
Q q;
q.~Q ();
new (q) T;
would be. Object lifetime is precisely specified and I don't see where it is
tied
Roman Gareev gareevro...@gmail.com writes:
I've attached the patch, which contains generation of Gimple code from
isl_ast_node_block. Is it fine for trunk?
2014-07-22 Roman Gareev gareevro...@gmail.com
gcc/
* graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
bilbotheelffri...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it be a good idea to allow multiple match_and_simplify within for ?
I see no good reason to disallow it.
Thus I have installed the patch.
Thanks,
Richard.
* genmatch.c (parse_for): Adjust to parse
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
bilbotheelffri...@gmail.com wrote:
I was displaying pattern = number for debugging some issue related to
implementing for-pattern, not meant for dumping with -v
Removed accordingly.
* genmatch.c (main): Remove unnecessary debug
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
bilbotheelffri...@gmail.com wrote:
This patch changes syntax of inner-if to be parenthesized - (if (cond))
* genmatch.c (parse_match_and_simplify): Adjust to parse parenthesized if.
(peek_ident): New function.
* match.pd: Adjust
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
In the experiment, about 60% (1019/1699) profile data files are empty
(all counters are zero).
Well, but you are globally overriding options even for the parts with
profile. The whole point of profile-feedback is to get
On 22/07/14 17:29, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Jiong Wang jiong.w...@arm.com wrote:
currently the following testcases are disabled for arm target,
gcc.dg/ira-shrinkwrap-prep-1.c
gcc.dg/ira-shrinkwrap-prep-2.c
gcc.dg/pr10474.c
the reason is on arm target,
On 23/07/2014 11:13, Rainer Orth wrote:
Roman Gareev gareevro...@gmail.com writes:
I've attached the patch, which contains generation of Gimple code from
isl_ast_node_block. Is it fine for trunk?
2014-07-22 Roman Gareev gareevro...@gmail.com
gcc/
*
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Trevor Saunders tsaund...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 06:36:31AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:40:53PM -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
+ public:
+
+ /* Start incremential hashing, optionally with SEED. */
+ void
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Horst Schirmeier ho...@schirmeier.com wrote:
Hi,
when reading the gcc/opts.c sources, I noticed that the docs don't
mention -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns along the other switches enabled
with -O3.
This documentation was missing since this option's
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Wei Mi w...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch is to fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61776
It records func decls whose const/pure flags are reset during
instrumentation. After the loop resetting const/pure flags, find out
stmts calling those
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
Ed's submission of the logistic regression distribution caused problems
for me because, like Ed, I have changes to the ext/random header in my
tree for a long time. Time to submit them.
This first one is a new distribution. It generates coordinates
On 07/22/2014 01:53 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
+ if (cxx_dialect cxx1z)
+ {
+ /* Look for the `class' keyword. */
+ cp_parser_require_keyword (parser, RID_CLASS, RT_CLASS);
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ /* Look for the `class' or 'typename'
I have a release on file with the FSF, but don't have SVN write access.
Problem description:
asm_fprintf allows platforms to add support for new format specifiers by
using the ASM_FPRINTF_EXTENSIONS macro. ARM uses this to add support
for %@ and %r specifiers.
However, it isn't enough to
On 23/07/14 11:58 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
* can't we end up dividing by 0 if all values of the normal
distribution happen to be 0?
As an aside, we already have divide-by-zero bugs in ext/random, it
would be nice if someone could look at that.
On 07/22/2014 02:34 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
As discussed during the Cauldron keeping some builtin doesn't help because
you are not forced to access the newly created object via the pointer returned
by the placement new. That is,
template T
struct Storage {
char x[sizeof(T)];
On 15/07/14 13:03 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 14/07/14 20:31 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This adds printers for the types in the std::experimental namespace.
This should fix the test failures that Paolo and HJ are seeing, older
versions of GDB didn't have the gdb.Type.name attribute.
I guess some optimizations are controlled only by optimize_size, not
by the profile.
Other optimizations are controlled by the profile.
So this patch does not have very much effectiveness (only 0.9% size reduction).
2014-07-23 17:26 GMT+08:00 Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Wed,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/22/2014 02:34 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
As discussed during the Cauldron keeping some builtin doesn't help because
you are not forced to access the newly created object via the pointer
returned
by the placement
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess some optimizations are controlled only by optimize_size, not
by the profile.
I only see tree-inline.c:estimate_move_cost which we should indeed fix,
it could make a significant difference.
One other use in
Ping?
Hello,
in testing the rs6000 ABI patches I noted a weird effect: usually, the
-Wpsabi warning notes are ignored in the compat test suites, so we get
a clean test run anyway.
However, when running the C++ version of the struct-layout-1.exp case
*alone* (using
The following patch makes us use profile-guided size/speed metrics
for MOVE_RATIO in estimate_move_cost. The estimate_num_insn
user update is obvious but the rest not exactly - I've choosen
size metrics everywhere but in ipa-cp.c:estimate_local_effects
(because there the result is used in some
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:51:37AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Wei Mi w...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch is to fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61776
It records func decls whose const/pure flags are reset during
Hi,
The following patch makes us use profile-guided size/speed metrics
for MOVE_RATIO in estimate_move_cost. The estimate_num_insn
user update is obvious but the rest not exactly - I've choosen
size metrics everywhere but in ipa-cp.c:estimate_local_effects
(because there the result is used
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Pengfei Yuan 0xcool...@gmail.com wrote:
In the experiment, about 60% (1019/1699) profile data files are empty
(all counters are zero).
Well, but you are globally overriding options even for the parts with
profile. The whole point of profile-feedback is to
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00616.html
On 06/06/2014 05:07 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
There's a problem when offloading from a compiler for one target machine
to another: the machine specific options don't necessarily match. This
patch tries to address this.
The idea is
I guess some optimizations are controlled only by optimize_size, not
by the profile.
Other optimizations are controlled by the profile.
So this patch does not have very much effectiveness (only 0.9% size
reduction).
0.9% size reduction counts as very much in compiler developers perspective
Hi!
In context of adding support for OpenACC, next to the existing
GIMPLE_OMP_TARGET (quoting from gcc/gimple.def and gcc/gimple.h):
DEFGSCODE(GIMPLE_OMP_TARGET, gimple_omp_target, GSS_OMP_PARALLEL_LAYOUT)
/* GIMPLE_OMP_TARGET */
struct GTY((tag(GSS_OMP_PARALLEL_LAYOUT)))
Bultin macros like __FILE__, __DATE__, etc. had wrong locus - always
column 1. This patch fixes it by giving those macros location
of the expansion point, i.e, the location, where builtin macro is used.
It now also does the correct thing if we do e.g.
#define F __FILE__.
Bootstrapped/regtested
Jakub reported to me that bounds-2.c test fails with
-fstack-protector-strong -Os. The following hack fixes it.
Tested x86_64-linux, applying to trunk as obvious.
2014-07-23 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* c-c++-common/ubsan/bounds-2.c (fn4): Adjust to check the array size
Hi all!
This is a friendly reminder message.
On 07/17/2014 03:22 PM, Marat Zakirov wrote:
On 07/16/2014 01:32 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 16/07/14 10:22, Marat Zakirov wrote:
Christophe,
Please look at a new patch. Draft tests are OK.
I'll ask your commit approval when full regression
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
