On Oct 8, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 10/06/2012 11:59 AM, _ wrote:
>> Not that I think that STL/Boost are not great solutions for many
>> problems out there.
>> But the fact is that there is and always will be c/c++ code that can't
>> and will not use it.
>
> But surely the set
, then aclocal could be invoked with similar options
everywhere.
Having multiple copies of the same files in the tree and using
different versions of the autotools to generate other files in
different subdirs is just asking fro trouble, don't you think?
Peter
> for over a week, so do not know when this was introduced...
>
> This was introduced by:
> 2006-11-01 Pete Steinmetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Peter Bergner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * doc/invoke.texi: Add cpu_type power6x
>
> The function
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 11:36:00PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> The parallel that is causing the ICE is a store with update RTL insn.
> It seems like we should detect that and reach into the parallel and
> grab the actual store insn. I'll look into adding that.
I'm testing t
was reported half a
> year ago and at least three people worked on fixing. So once your patches
> are ready, go ahead and submit them.
28181 has been popping up over the last several years in various forms
(5373, 13803, 18421, 23695, etc).
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
someone has gone to
at least the effort of reporting only to get ignored if no
further information is forthcoming - perhaps the description of the
issue is enough for some energetic intern to come along and create a
testcase, who knows?
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
l be added)?
I don't have the option of using my own version of gcc with the patch applied;
the build system I maintain has to be able to use the version of gcc installed
with the operating system.
-Peter
'm really concerned about the manuals
warning of the input and output operads being in seperate places.
Which form is correct?
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
atile__("addl %2,%0" : "=m" (*v) : "m" (*v), "d" (i));
}
Is that correct? And if so, then isn't the documentation wrong?
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*v, int i)
{
__asm__ __volatile__("addl %1,%0" : "+m" (*v) : "d" (i));
}
Then the compiler complains with:
/asm/atomic.h:33: warning: read-write constraint does not allow a register
So is the warning wrong?
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rface, the warning disapears. It does also not happen
if you write
#pragma implementation "undefined_constructor.hpp"
in the cpp file.
It apears to be triggered when using a template class with a base class.
I had similar warnings for a missing destructor.
Peter Soetens
#pragma inte
I'm in the midst of fixing the m68k prologue/epilogue code for
ColdFire and its FPU, and stumbled across a problem. The following
code when compiled with -O2 -mcfv4e -fomit-frame-pointer (with the v4e cod in):
double func(int i1, int i2, int i3, int i4, double a, double b)
{
int stuff[8192];
>Peter Barada wrote:
>> I'd like to make the reload look like:
>> (set (reg:SI y) (plus:SI (reg_SI 16) (const_int 32832)))
>> (set (reg:DF x) (mem:DF (reg:SI y)))
>
>Reload already knows how to make this transformation, so it should not
>be necessary to resort
ot configure will use 'as' in your path
and find your host assembler instead.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
407 has more instructions and less restrictive addressing modes on
some instructions than the 5200 has.
Can anyone take a stab at describing *how* to debug this? Is this
just a case where there are so many live registers that reload has
just backed itself into a corner?
Any suggestions are appreciated!
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
r complex float of long double or smaller */
if ((GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_FLOAT
|| GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_COMPLEX_FLOAT)
&& (((GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE (mode) <= 12) && TARGET_68881)
|| ((GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE (mode) <= 8) && TARGET_CFV4E)))
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
Any further insight or suggestions are *really* appreciated!
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
if ((GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_FLOAT
|| GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_COMPLEX_FLOAT)
&& (((GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE (mode) <= 12) && TARGET_68881)
|| ((GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE (mode) <= 8) && TARGET_CFV4E)))
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
Any further insight or suggestions are *really* appreciated!
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
68881|TARGET_CFV4E) && (CLASS == FP_REGS || CLASS ==
DATA_OR_FP_REGS) \
? FP_REGS : NO_REGS) \
: (TARGET_PCREL \
&& (GET_CODE (X) == SYMBOL_REF || GET_CODE (X) == CONST \
|| GET_CODE (X) == LABEL_REF))\
? ADDR_REGS \
: (CLASS))
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1421? I'll dig into it with gdb, but there's so
much code in reload that a clue or two would *really* help :)
I'll undo the change to PREFERRED_RELOAD_CLASS, and then change the
'?a' to '*a' in addsi3_5200 to see if that helps reload to not pick
and ADDR_REG for the value. If it still fails, I'll regenerate all
the information as I did in the 2nd email to you.
Thanks!
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
the ?a change. What in the .lreg
dump am I looking for that will tellm "where regclass things that the
register should go"? Is it:
;; Register 1421 in 0.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ing and Porting GNU CC" manual for rev 2.95, and am
looking around for a newer one and can't find it anywhere. Does
anyone know if a newer printed manual is available(and if so, where I
can find it)?
Eventually I'll have to try my changes on gcc-4.0 to see what that does.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
had punched paper and a duplex
laser printer. Here at home I have neither.
>If you mean a printed and bound book published by somebody else, I
>don't think there is a newer one available.
I like the printed book since I can dog-ear pages and scribble notes
in it. As it is, my 2.95 version's binding is nearly fallying apart :)
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
4 and 4.0
cohabitation? --- the 2 versions are installed in separate
directories, however, the run-path, used by the dynamic linker,
containing libgcc_s.so is shared.
If someone can give me a pointer toward the relevant documentation I
would be grateful.
--
Peter FELECAN
Jakub Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:23:26PM +0200, Peter FELECAN wrote:
> > Currently the libgcc_s.so library has the same version in 3.4 and 4.0,
> > i.e libgcc_s.so.1 (SONAME = libgcc_s.so.1).
> >
> > Is this as expected?
>
Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:23:26PM +0200, Peter FELECAN wrote:
> > > > Currently the libgcc_s.so library has the same version in 3.4 and 4.0,
> > > > i.e libgcc_s.so.1 (SONAME = libgcc_s.so.1).
> > > >
> >
o limited memory and
no usable mass-storage device on the hardware I have available, so
hopefully a successful crossbuild will suffice.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ve to repeat a few steps (build gcc twice, build glibc twice)
because glibc and gcc assume that a near-complete environment is
available(such as gcc needing headers, and glibc needing -lgcc-eh), so
even really fast machines(2.4Ghz P4) take an hour to do a cross-build
from scratch.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-lgcc-eh), so
>> even really fast machines(2.4Ghz P4) take an hour to do a cross-build
>> from scratch.
>
>This could be made substantially easier if libgcc moved to the top
>level. You wanna help out with that?
Uh, ok. What do you mean by "move to the top level"?
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ll obvioulsy make it take
longer.
>A 2.4 Ghz P4 isn't what I would consider an obsolete machine and it took
>90 minutes for "make" -- not a full bootstrap.
Even on a 3.0Ghz P4 with HT, 1Gb DDR and a hardware RAID with SATA
drives it takes about 30 minutes so there's a
packages out there that can't
cross-configure/compile (openssh, perl as examples off the top of my
head) without a *lot* of work.
Its just that it takes a lot of time and work to cross-build a non-x86
linux environment to verify any changes in the toolchain.
And comments like "get
ce.
>
>How about a successful crossbuild plus
>passing some regression test suite,
>e.g. gcc's, glibc's, and/or ltp's?
>Any one of them would provide a nice reality check.
I'm open to running them if there's a *really* clear how-to to do it
that takes into account remote hardware.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
a libtool bug.
Peter
- --
Peter O'Gorman - http://www.pogma.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBQnY4v7iDAg3OZTLPAQI5wQP8Dwy/k5Oqx0LdWwrz1Yc+CafsVhlZ20sR
QzETUpZPIMyEWniL37/Sw0eu6PIKjOMZaOaHryvORRD9gparbc9fGtKxBWWmWmXX
AM3xUSqT6Uz2g//yzv/Kc
r lots and
| lots and lots of library files one after another in exactly the same way,
| yes?
<http://libtool-cache.sourceforge.net/>
Peter
- --
Peter O'Gorman - http://www.pogma.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBQngOnriDAg3OZTLPAQItXAP+NTK3ye0bzQO
of a convenienve library to hold several
thousand object files and then making a shared library with the convenience
library. On many platforms, those without a --whole-archive flag, libtool
will extract the convenience archive all over again. Linking the shared
library all in one go would be faster.
libtool on powerpc-apple-darwin8.0.0
Surprisingly, the compiler actually built on darwin8 and even passed many of
it's tests.
Any @apple person want to backport the necessary bits to the 3.4 branch?
Peter
- --
Peter O'Gorman - http://www.pogma.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version:
native compilations using an NFSroot with limited main memory and
don't have a disk in the hardware design to swap to.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ting the "get faster hardware" as the patent
cure-all to execution speed problems, but in my case, there is no
other hardware I can use.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
oping that the build doesn't blow its brains out due to a "minor"
increase in memory consumption.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
natively built that compounds the problem.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ity of reference since poor locality will
cause thrashing if the RSS is set low enough. Of course if the RSS is
set too low than *any* pattern of page access will cause thrashing.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
o it, but please
understand that Linux systems are built using GCC, whether its for a
workstation or an embedeed Linux device, and as such *should* consider
the problems that both encounter and not just favor the workstation end.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Yes, but Ralf was complaining about embedded cross-compiling development
>> for RTEMS. I have not tried to reply to Peter Barada who complains about
>> GCC inablity to be run on embedded targets directly.
>
>Logically Peter's situation is the same as the Net
t;slower.
Its currently NFS all the way. :)
>How much RAM?
128Mb. I do have some experimental kernel hacks in to allow swapping
via NFS, so you can understand why it can take *days* to build stuff.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ince it can't cache any source.
>I build GCC while at work (i.e., while away from the notebook at home :-)
>
>Try it ... it works,
Huh? I can cross-compile GCC, its all the packages that require
native configuration/building
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s, causing "larger memory
requirements" of flash, not DRAM.
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
omips: 2287.20, cpu MHz: 1145.142).
>
>Comparisions like yours are worse than meaningless.
I wouldn't call it meaningless. I don't have other benchmark numbers
for the chip, and it was menat to show that it isn't a blazingly fast
processor (as compared to desktop machines).
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Stump wrote:
| Anyway, I guess I would just recommend using 4.0 and ignoring the older
| releases if you can.. :-(
I think he has to, as far as I know the changes to use libSystemStubs on
tiger were never backported to 3.4 and 3.3.
Peter
Mike Stump wrote:
On Wednesday, June 1, 2005, at 07:01 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
I think he has to, as far as I know the changes to use libSystemStubs on
tiger were never backported to 3.4 and 3.3.
If one uses fink to install the older compiler, it just works. :-(
Fink patched thei
needs options to select ColdFire specific behavior.
Thanks in advance!
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ion.
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBQuquO7iDAg3OZTLPAQIIYwP9Hd2I4B4RFNZTx0KdCWfxYz++WE+d3mn3
LYXN1tV7KqwrMKIkm/Nk+DIFg+71FR4/DphJl8MN6IDrHGnPzYuWnlVbX1QAj6UZ
x/wbPp/q+2/iezfSuTmtRvKmzRnN8sFgb0S1Yit3nVOwt+NsNNh1iD+TWN4QO86M
2cwTzjBPff8=
=rd/3
-END
tion '-bob'
xgcc: no input files
imac% ./xgcc -bob-most
xgcc: couldn't run './ob-most-gcc-4.1.0': No such file or directory
imac% ./xgcc why -bob-most
xgcc: '-b' must come at the start of the command line
Thanks,
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Gnu
James E Wilson wrote:
This revised patch does appear to fix the only complaint that Geoff had
with the original patch. I think it is OK with the typo fixed and the
addition of a doc change.
OK, done.
Thank you.
Peter
2005-08-?? Peter O'Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ot of with
this issue :-(, google gives a lot of hits on the issue but it is a bit
hard to get the current impl. status for 3.4. Which in turn makes it
hard to decide on how to bandage our foot.
Kind regards,
Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 06:12 -0700, Dan Kegel wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please
> > with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is:
> > - in general,
> > - as
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:33 -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On this controversial subject, could somebody please - pretty please
> > > with a cherry on top - tell me what the current status is:
> > >
ack of exception information set in:
glibc-2.3.5/nptl/unwind.c:__pthread_unwind()
Hence once is left in the situation where both forward and backward are
not an option.
Nor do I think they (being the company I work for) will allow me to ship
patched versions of libpthread.so and libstdc++.so.5.
Too bad, guess I have to redesign the issue.
Peter Zijlstra
the idea: "Register allocation method
and apparatus for truncating runaway lifetimes of program variables
in a computer system". I have no idea whether this was one of the
patents made available by IBM for use by the OSS community or not.
Peter
--
Peter Bergner
Linux on Power Toolchain
IBM Linux Technology Center
e, you really need to handle these new
definitions specially otherwise you'll lose optimization opportunities.
Peter
an run the libtool line above this one, with "sh -x" (e.g. sh -x
../libtool ...>& ltlog.txt) and send me the log privately, I should be able
to see if current libtool still has this issue (and maybe find a
workaround). Please don't send the log to this list.
Thanks,
Peter
-
There was some discussion a few weeks ago about some apps running slower
with FDO enabled.
I've recently investigated a similar situation using mainline. In my case,
the fact that the loop_optimize pass is disabled during FDO was the cause
of the slowdown. It appears that was recently disabled
>A more likely source of performance degradation is that loop unrolling
>is enabled when profiling, and loop unrolling is almost always a bad
>pessimization on 32 bits x86 targets.
To clarify, I was compiling with -funroll-loops and -fpeel-loops
enabled in both cases.
The FDO slowdown in my case
> Do you have specific testcase? It would be interesting to see if new
> optimizer can catch up at least on kill-loop branch.
Here is a simplified version of what I observed. In the non-FDO case,
the loop invariant load of the constant 32 is removed from the loop.
When FDO is enabled, the load r
>you may try adding -fmove-loop-invariants flag, which enables new
>invariant motion pass.
That cleaned up both my simplified test case, and the code it
originated from. It also cleaned up a few other cases where I
was noticing worse performance with FDO enabled. Thanks!!
Perhaps this option sh
nd ltmain.m4sh (ltconfig and ltmain.sh in gcc??) and change
either how it is set or how it is run.
Another alternative would be to set RANLIB=: before configure if your system
does not need to ranlib anything.
Hope this helps,
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
| The problem is that libtool tries to run ranlib after install and that
| ranlib can fail if the library is not writable?
[crosspost - beware - for context see
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-08/msg00937.html>]
1-5.
Thank you,
Peter
2005-09-01 Peter O'Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* libltdl/m4/libtool.m4 (old_postintall_cmds): chmod 644 before
running ranlib.
Reported by Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
kend to figure out where that would go in your tree.
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBQxeQrLiDAg3OZTLPAQIZjQP9H3NKZd2r/AMNrqG+0pJ4WEdBgo8J/WUC
JZMY0l3JElo81UugL/2T5OOJvESmO6N5iiZj4blACg3m3cgPIuuFZ+K+UmV6rQW0
ypOauMYu6Un5SLlGV3KHm5qdLYqPPzyOLJfjCDvnNGcdBst
always installed with INSTALL_DATA and gcc's aclocal.m4 always sets that
to INSTALL_DATA='${INSTALL} -m 644' if it is otherwise unset.
Do have an INSTALL_DATA var set in your environment?
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBQxqoQLiD
stcase. Hopefully some kind volunteer will spend their
valuable time to fix it. But if you don't report it, tough, don't
complain about it...
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quick question on syntax in md files as I'm not finding the documentation
to explain it. If I see the following on an instruction definition:
(set_attr "type" "*")
What does * represent in this context as the value to assign to "type"?
Thanks.
Pete
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
| We currently perform the following sequence of commands as part of the
| installation (-m 444 being the default on current FreeBSD systems).
I can not see where freebsd could be getting a -m 444 from. The libraries
are a
I'm not entirely sure how gcc's CFG structure all fits together yet, so
I'll ask for some input on this one:
While looking through some dumps from a compile using -fprofile-use, I
noticed the following in the "jump" dump file:
Basic block 164 prev 163, next -2, loop_depth 0, count 1672, freq 148
Added a better subject line.. Pete.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 09/30/2005 11:03:59 AM:
>
> I'm not entirely sure how gcc's CFG structure all fits together yet, so
> I'll ask for some input on this one:
>
> While looking through some dumps from a compile using -fprofile-use, I
> noticed the follo
> output to c++filt.
|>
|> Also this perl script works fine on powerpc-darwin7.4.0 also.
|
|
| Turns out it was rpm getting in the middle of the game for me... case
| closed.
I am quite curious as to how rpm got "in the middle of the game" here.
Please explain.
Peter
-BEGIN PG
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Sep 29, 2005, "Peter O'Gorman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I posted a patch that nobody has had time to look at for this, even if
it is not acceptable (it would probably be better if it reset the
permissions after calling ranlib) I'
Does the uberbaum tree exist on savanna, or is it only on
sources.redhat.com? If so, what is the procedure for accessing it?
Thanks in advance...
--
Peter Barada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard Henderson wrote:
To keep all this in perspective, folks should remember that atomic
operations are *slow*. Very very slow. Orders of magnitude slower
than function calls. Seriously. Taking p4 as the extreme example,
one can expect a null function call in around 10 cycles, but a locke
problems with the current register allocator.
Let me also say that I look forward to helping out anyway I can with
this project.
Peter
Live Range Disjointer [page(s) 6]:
* As an FYI for others, this is also know in Chaitin's paper as
"Right Number of Names" and also as "
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 22:56 +0100, an unknown sender wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 November 2005 20:26, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > Insn Annotations [page(s) 17-18]:
> > * I like the idea of easy access to the register usage info
> > provided by the insn annotations. R
ot; if we were to use 10^nesting
level. That said, I think we're all in agreement that using basic
block frequencies from the cfg is the correct thing to do and that
taking static spill instruction counts into account is a good idea
which Andrew's proposal does by using it as a tie breaker.
I assume it goes without saying that when using -Os, spill cost will
be used as the tie breaker when two pseudos have the same static spill
instruction counts.
Peter
for exception model to use... configure: error: unable to
detect exception model
make[1]: *** [configure-target-libstdc++-v3] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/src/gcc-4.0-20051117/build'
make: *** [bootstrap] Error 2
I'm sure I'm doing something horribly wrong her
On page: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/
The Following are corrupted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.4.5/gnat_ugn_unw.pdf
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.4.5/gnat_ugn_unw-html.tar.gz
And the link
(http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.4.5/docs-sources.tar.gz ) to t
he assignment to best.d never happens
in the loop which leaves trash in best.d since best is allocated off
the stack and holds trash until initialized. Hence the warning for
reading at a possibly unitialized variable.
Initialize best.d where you initialize best.score to quiet the warning.
--
Pet
ECTED]>
| 2000: Martin v. Lwis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
See this thread:
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-standards/2005-03/msg2.html>
Or for the summary, Latin-1 should be used.
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBQ8x4XbiDAg3OZTLPA
owever, that's not sufficient because the tools fail to build too:
I'm adding Geoff Keating to the CC, hoping that he'll both shout at me while
explaining why this change to darwin.h is broken, and suggest a real fix.
This change allows gcc to build on powerpc-apple-darwin8.4 wi
essing I'm not the only one who would like this info, so maybe
someone can add this to our wiki?
Peter
te.html a few days ago now also removed svn.html.
The rsync.html page can be removed too, since that was a way to download
the entire svn repo. With git clone, you get the entire repo, so rsync
isn't needed anymore.
Peter
e releases/gcc-9" into our branch and I'm not
seeing any From-SVN: in any of the commit messages. Where/how are
you seeing those?
Peter
On 1/23/20 12:09 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 1/23/20 4:29 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> so it is not a fast forward merge and we have the requirement that
>> From-SVN: shouldn't appear in commit logs of new commits.
>
> So I just did "git merge releases/gcc-9"
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:41:33PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Its fine to focus on userspace first, but the kernel is far more simple.
>
> Looking at that presentation, the only thing missing for kernel is the
> notrack thunks, in the unlikely case that such code would be tolerated
> (Frankly,
+ lots of people and linux-toolchains
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:31:42PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I was looking at the recent linux patch series [1] where segment
> qualifiers (named address spaces) were introduced to handle percpu
> variables. In the patch [2], the author mention
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 01:38:51PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 01:47:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > + lots of people and linux-toolchains
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 07:31:42PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Hell
On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 11:50:15AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 11:46 AM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 01:47:13PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > + lots of people and linux-toolchains
> >
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:42:58AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> When I think of qualifiers, I think of const and volatile. I'm not
> sure why the first post I'm cc'ed on talks about "segment" qualifiers.
> Maybe it's in reference to a variable attribute that the kernel
> defines? Looking at
fiers. The syntax as proposed above seems
very error prone to me.
---
Subject: compiler: Improve __unqual_typeof()
Improve our __unqual_scalar_typeof() implementation by relying on C
dropping qualifiers for lvalue convesions. There is one small catch in
that GCC is currently known broken in this re
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 12:10:56PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Another way to drop qualifiers is using a cast. So you
> > > can use typeof twice:
> > >
> > > typeof((typeof(_var))_var) tmp__;
> > >
> > > This also works for non-scal
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 12:23:17PM +, Uecker, Martin wrote:
> > > > Another way to drop qualifiers is using a cast. So you
> > > > can use typeof twice:
> > > >
> > > > typeof((typeof(_var))_var) tmp__;
> > > >
> > > > This also works for non-scalars but this is a GCC extension.
>
> (That c
On 5 June 2015 at 16:55, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> The GCC manual says "GCC does not use the latitude given in C99 and C11
> only to treat certain aspects of signed '<<' as undefined, but this is
> subject to change". It would certainly be nice if they removed the
> "this is subject to change" part.
ther below or by mailing the
Cerberus mailing list:
cl-cerbe...@lists.cam.ac.uk
https://lists.cam.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cl-cerberus
many thanks,
Kayvan Memarian and Peter Sewell (University of Cambridge)
What is C in practice? (Cerberus survey): C
On 26 June 2015 at 18:08, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Peter Sewell wrote:
>
>> **If you calculate an offset between two separately allocated C memory
>> objects (e.g. malloc'd regions or global or local variables) by
>> pointer subtraction, can you
1 - 100 of 820 matches
Mail list logo
