Tobias Burnus wrote:
libquadmath's math functions are based on (but not identical to)
GLIBC's sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128 functions. In the attached patch, I
have ported the bug fixes from GLIBC over to libquadmath. Hopefully,
the port is complete and correct.
Slightly updated version,
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 04:52:19PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Tobias Burnus wrote:
libquadmath's math functions are based on (but not identical to)
GLIBC's sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128 functions. In the attached patch,
I have ported the bug fixes from GLIBC over to libquadmath.
Hopefully, the
Jakub Jelinek:
I think it would be nice if you also posted the changes you did to
test-ldouble.c and libm-test.inc, so that next time we could more
easily test it again.
See attachment. (I didn't do it properly at first, thus, I had to
propagate the changes to the right files …)
Tobias
/*
Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de writes:
diff --git a/math/libm-test.inc b/math/libm-test.inc
index 1e067fe..81b40b6 100644
--- a/math/libm-test.inc
+++ b/math/libm-test.inc
@@ -226,5 +226,5 @@ static FLOAT max_error, real_max_error, imag_max_error;
#define BUILD_COMPLEX(real, imag) \
-
On 10/28/12 20:43:05, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch fixes PR55106. A value in GENERAL_REGS is
inherited into a move with destination pseudo of SSE_REGS. It
results into secondary move for which inheritance is tried again an
again. It means cycling LRA passes.
The patch
With ASSOCIATE (A = array), one generates internally A as
AS_DEFERRED array. However, it is neither a pointer nor allocatable,
unless array is.
When passing A as actual argument to a non-descriptor dummy,
trans-array.c assumed that the actual argument had no descriptor, which
lead to wrong
On 12-10-31 12:33 PM, Gary Funck wrote:
On 10/28/12 20:43:05, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch fixes PR55106. A value in GENERAL_REGS is
inherited into a move with destination pseudo of SSE_REGS. It
results into secondary move for which inheritance is tried again an
again. It
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Tobias Burnus wrote:
libquadmath's math functions are based on (but not identical to) GLIBC's
sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128 functions. In the attached patch, I have ported the
bug fixes from GLIBC over to libquadmath. Hopefully, the port is complete
With ASSOCIATE (A = array), one generates internally A as AS_DEFERRED
array. However, it is neither a pointer nor allocatable, unless array is.
When passing A as actual argument to a non-descriptor dummy, trans-array.c
assumed that the actual argument had no descriptor, which lead to wrong
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Jakub Jelinek:
I think it would be nice if you also posted the changes you did to
test-ldouble.c and libm-test.inc, so that next time we could more easily
test it again.
See attachment. (I didn't do it properly at first, thus, I had to propagate
On 10/31/2012 10:05 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
I don't see any == double_int_one (or zero) comparisons in grep,
so I'd say inner_size.is_one () should be used instead (which is used
pretty frequently). Ditto in the second spot.
Otherwise the patch looks good to me, but I'd like Jason to chime in
On 10/31/2012 06:13 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
+ if (outer_nelts_check != NULL inner_size.is_one())
Uhm, I will add the missing space before commit. Sorry.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team
This patch renames sbitmap iterators to unify them with the bitmap iterators.
Remove the unused EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_SBITMAP_REV, which has an unconventional
interface.
Rename the sbitmap_iter_* functions to match bitmap's bmp_iter_* functions.
Add an additional parameter to the initialization and
On Oct 31, 2012, at 2:45 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:.
My comment was for isolated code parts that are being rewritten
(I think it was the wide-int class). Consistency comes first.
In the case of wide int, we only use references in one very narrow way. We use
const T
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Ping.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my previous patch to
On 10/31/2012 09:49 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Kenneth Zadeck
zad...@naturalbridge.com wrote:
jakub,
i am hoping to get the rest of my wide integer conversion posted by nov 5.
I am under some adverse conditions here: hurricane sandy hit her pretty
badly. my
Jakub,
it is hard from all of the threads to actually distill what the real
issues are here. So let me start from a clean slate and state them simply.
Richi has three primary objections:
1) that we can do all of this with a templated version of double-int.
2) that we should not be passing
Hi,
The patch is about ThreadSanitizer. ThreadSanitizer is a data race
detector for C/C++ programs. It contains two parts: instrumentation
and runtime library. This patch is the first part, and runtime will be
included in the second part. Dmitry(dvyu...@google.com) is the author
of this part, and
The following patch fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55150
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 193042.
2012-10-31 Vladimir Makarov vmaka...@redhat.com
PR middle-end/55150
* lra-constraints.c (lra_constraints):
OK.
Jason
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
Richi,
Let me explain to you what a broken api is. I have spent the last week
screwing around with tree-vpn and as of last night i finally got it to work.
In tree-vpn, it is clear that double-int is the precise definition of a
broken api.
The
Dehao's patch will make the debugging of the following code (-g -O2)
less jumpy. After the testing of x 0, it should go to line 'a++'.
Without the fix, when stepping through 'abc', the lines covered are
6, 4, 11, 13. With the fix it should be 6, 9, 11, 13 -- much better.
David
1. int x;
On Oct 31, 2012, at 5:44 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
the
fact that len ends up being mutable is another thing I dislike about
wide-int.
We expose len for construction only, it is non-mutating. During construction,
there is no previous value.
If wide-ints are cheap
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Easwaran Raman
On Oct 31, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
I propose that no wide-int member function
may _change_ it's len (to something larger).
We never do that, so, we already do as you wish. We construct wide ints, and
we have member functions to construct values. We
On 2012-10-31 19:09, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Original message at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg00013.html
Thanks in advance.
Ok.
r~
On Oct 31, 2012, at 7:05 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
You have an artificial limit on what 'len' can be.
No. There is no limit, and nothing artificial. We take the maximum of the
needs of the target, the maximum of the front-ends and the maximum of the
mid-end and the
On 30.10.2012 17:59, Teresa Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Hot/cold partitioning is apparently a hot topic all of a sudden, which
is a good thing of course, because it's in need of some TLC.
The attached patch adds another
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Christophe Lyon
christophe.l...@st.com wrote:
On 30.10.2012 17:59, Teresa Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
Hot/cold partitioning is apparently a hot topic all of a sudden, which
is a good
+ // The front-end should have caught outer aborts without
+ // an outer transaction.
+ gcc_unreachable ();
Err, no the final check there would be if the current function includes
attribute may_throw_abort_outer (sp). Just return here I think for now.
On 2012-11-01 07:31, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
+ // Hmmm, the front-end should have caught outer aborts without
+ // an outer transaction. Bail and hope for the best.
+ tree attrs = get_attrs_for (current_function_decl);
+ if (!attrs || !lookup_attribute
This patch to libgo changes the goc2c program to change the Go type
int to the C type intgo. This is in preparation for changing the Go
type int to be 64 bits on x86_64. The goc2c program used to be used
by the gc compiler, but it no longer is, so while I was there I removed
the gc support.
Dear Tobias,
Looks obvious if you ask me ...
..and to me too. OK for trunk.
Thanks
Paul
On 10/30/2012 10:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I try to adapt pretty printer code but haven't been able to test it as I
don't have the necessary gdb version and don't have time to update it at the
moment. If you prefer I can leave it untouched.
Please try to install a newer GDB, building
On 31 October 2012 22:14, François Dumont wrote:
On 10/30/2012 10:26 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Are you sure all GDB 7.x should work ? I have gdb 7.1 and when running
pretty printers tests I have:
Spawning: gdb -nw -nx -quiet -batch -ex python print
gdb.lookup_global_symbol
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31 October 2012 22:14, François Dumont wrote:
Here is the patch I came to. I use the 'universal reference' like you
propose but some tests started to fail because I think gcc called it instead
of the move constructor.
Ah of course. The
This patch removes the unused ebitmap, and then removes some sbitmap functions
only used by ebitmap. The functions removed are:
SET_BIT_WITH_POPCOUNT
RESET_BIT_WITH_POPCOUNT
bitmap_copy_n
bitmap_range_empty_p
sbitmap_popcount
In addition, two functions have been made private to the
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
It failed with revision 188008.
OK, thanks. So the testcase never compiled on the trunk (except for about
24
hours between 188009 188118) or did it compile before 188008 at some
point?
--
Eric Botcazou
It was
On 31 October 2012 22:46, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 31 October 2012 22:14, François Dumont wrote:
Here is the patch I came to. I use the 'universal reference' like you
propose but some tests started to fail because I think gcc called it
instead
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
Sure, I will give this a try after your verification patch tests
complete. Does this mean that the patch you posted above to
force_nonfallthru_and_redirect is no longer needed either? I'll see if
I can avoid the need for some of my fixes,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Ping.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Easwaran Raman era...@google.com
wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes bugs introduced by my
Hi Jason,
Just wanted to be sure you saw this. I'm hoping to get it in for stage 1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg02684.html
Sterling
Hi!
Just a couple of random comments:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:34:10AM -0700, Wei Mi wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2012-10-31 Wei Mi w...@gmail.com
If Dmitry wrote parts of the patch, it would be nice to mention
him in the ChangeLog too.
* Makefile.in (tsan.o): New
* passes.c
Hi,
the testcase bellow started to fail because we now inline the call of _Exit to
call to bar. Fixed thus.
Honza
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 193049)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2012-10-31 Jan
(CC list trimmed.)
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
Hi,
This patch introduces a new RTL expression called define_subst and
required by it define_subst_attr.
The new feature allows to make MD-files more compact - it defines a
rule by which a parser could generate modified versions
Hi,
When -fcompare_debug is used, what we really want to do is to compare
instructions between the -g version and -gtoggle version. However,
current dump file still contains the source line in its rtl dump. This
patch changes to only dump rtl without dumping its source info.
Bootstrapped and
From: Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com
This adds a new C/C++ option to force
__attribute__((no_instrument_function)) on every function compiled.
This is useful together with LTO. You may want to have the whole
program compiled with -pg and have to specify that in the LTO
link, but want to disable
This changes the forward_list::assign() members to assign to existing
elements instead of destroying them and reallocating new ones, as
allowed by the Sequence Container requirements. The copy assignment
operator already did that, so now it uses assign(). For QoI we still
support non-assignable
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:53 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
It failed with revision 188008.
OK, thanks. So the testcase never compiled on the trunk (except for about
24
hours between 188009 188118) or did
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:57 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:53 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
It failed with revision 188008.
OK, thanks. So the testcase never compiled on
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:57 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:53 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
wrote:
It failed
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:57 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:53 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
It failed with revision 188008.
OK, thanks. So the testcase never compiled on
On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 09:02 -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 14:55 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 08:53:31AM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
Great. Jakub, were you going to commit your change or did you want me
to do that?
I haven't tested it, you
Hi,
When debugging optimized code, it is always confusing when gdb jumped
to a place that has never been executed. This is because compiler
performs some aggressive code motion that moves an instruction outside
of its original residing basic block.
This patch tries to fix this problem by
Quoting Richard Sandiford rdsandif...@googlemail.com:
But what I'm trying to get at is: why can't the backend tell
shorten_branches about the amount of alignment/misalignment
that the target wants, and where? Via an attribute or a hook,
I don't mind which. But it should be declarative, rather
101 - 155 of 155 matches
Mail list logo
