Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net ha scritto:
Paolo?
... carte blanche to Jason! (but I have a little lexer tweak pending... ;)
Paolo
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 09:36:53PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
* I still have to do an all-language bootstrap and regtesting,
though the latter is probably pointless as there is currently not a
single -fasan test case.
--- gcc/asan.c.orig 2012-11-09 21:26:26.0 +0100
+++ gcc/asan.c
Hello!
Attached patch disparages riF-o alternative of *movti_internal_rex64
insn, as described by Vlad in comment #2 [1]
The core of the problem however is, that gcc is unable to detect
zero-extended address as offsetable. H.J. will propose a patch for
this [2].
2012-11-10 Vladimir Makarov
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
--- gcc/asan.c.orig 2012-11-09 21:26:26.0 +0100
+++ gcc/asan.c 2012-11-09 21:26:00.0 +0100
@@ -1362,6 +1362,8 @@ transform_statements (void)
instrument_assignment (i);
else if (is_gimple_call (s))
maybe_instrument_call
I wrote:
after the dicsussion on c.l.f, it become clear that passing a DO loop
variable to an INTENT(OUT) or INTENT(INOUT) dummy argument is an error.
The attached patch throws an error for both cases.
I chose to issue the errors as a front-end pass because we cannot check
for formal arguments
On 9 November 2012 22:09, Jason Merrill wrote:
Now that G++ uses the value of __cplusplus specified by the standard, we
don't need the other macro anymore.
OK for trunk, or should I save it for the next stage 1?
Jason
I'd been thinking about suggesting that change just the other day - do
A few more testsuite fixes to address failures on AIX. The only
really interesting one is g++.dg/other/anon5.C where Undefined is
capitalized in the AIX error message.
Thanks, David
* c-c++-common/scal-to-vec2.c: Ignore non-standard ABI message.
*
Il 10/11/2012 07:44, H.J. Lu ha scritto:
Hi,
In
(insn 19 17 20 2 (set (reg:TI 85 [ *_15 ])
(mem:TI (zero_extend:DI (reg:SI 82)) [0 *_15+0 S16 A32])) x.i:29 61
{*movti_internal_rex64}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 82)
(expr_list:REG_EQUIV (mem/c:TI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI
Il 10/11/2012 05:30, Andrew Pinski ha scritto:
Hi,
The problem here is that set PLUGIN_LD_SUFFIX to ld-new which is not
the final installed binary name. This patch fixes the problem by
changing if we got ld-new to just ld.
Note this issue has been around since 4.6 but not many people test
Tobias Burnus wrote:
So untested:
Thanks for the patch! It fixed the problem half way: It fixes the
second issue I had (fail10.ii,
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-11/msg00791.html ).
However, it didn't fix the original problem: As the call for strlen
directly returns, it never
On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 22:51:45 +0530, Siddhesh wrote:
I had reckoned that the behaviour could be reverted to what was before
while I figure out a way to get the warning in place for both cases,
i.e. with tree-vrp (where max_loop_iterations now causes the loop to
be folded away in -O2) and this
In the patch I installed for PR rtl-optimization/54315:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg00745.html
the special code dealing with BLKmode in registers at the beginning of
store_field is disabled for CALL_EXPR:
/* If we are storing into an unaligned field of an aligned union that
---
You've been invited by Claudiu Zissulescu to use Google Talk.
If you already have a Google account, login to Gmail and accept this chat
invitation:
Tested as described in the covering note. OK to install?
Richard
gcc/
* combine.c (make_extraction): Handle TRUNCATEd INNERs.
OK, thanks.
--
Eric Botcazou
Tested as described in the covering note. OK to install?
Richard
gcc/
* expr.h (adjust_address_1): Add a size parameter.
(adjust_address, adjust_address_nv, adjust_bitfield_address)
(adjust_bitfield_address_nv): Adjust accordingly.
Tested as described in the covering note. OK to install?
Richard
gcc/
* expmed.c (narrow_bit_field_mem): New function.
(store_bit_field_using_insv, store_bit_field_1, store_fixed_bit_field)
(extract_bit_field_1): Use it.
This looks better now, thanks.
--
Eric
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:46 AM, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
Il 10/11/2012 05:30, Andrew Pinski ha scritto:
Hi,
The problem here is that set PLUGIN_LD_SUFFIX to ld-new which is not
the final installed binary name. This patch fixes the problem by
changing if we got ld-new to just
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
Attached patch disparages riF-o alternative of *movti_internal_rex64
insn, as described by Vlad in comment #2 [1]
The core of the problem however is, that gcc is unable to detect
zero-extended address as
This patch fixes a bug comparing struct field types in the reflect
package. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Committed to mainline and 4.7 branch.
Ian
diff -r 8b1f2a35ded1 libgo/go/reflect/type.go
--- a/libgo/go/reflect/type.go Tue Nov 06 10:44:51 2012 -0800
+++
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:38:55AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
Il 10/11/2012 07:44, H.J. Lu ha scritto:
Hi,
In
(insn 19 17 20 2 (set (reg:TI 85 [ *_15 ])
(mem:TI (zero_extend:DI (reg:SI 82)) [0 *_15+0 S16 A32]))
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
I wrote:
after the dicsussion on c.l.f, it become clear that passing a DO loop
variable to an INTENT(OUT) or INTENT(INOUT) dummy argument is an error.
The attached patch throws an error for both cases.
But should we really isse an error
Hello,
This is another ICE in pre_and_rev_post_order_compute, called from
alias.c after register allocation.
The problem is that purge_all_dead_edges can make basic blocks
unreachable. Before my patch of r190602, alias.c handled unreachable
blocks (resulting in missed disambiguations). Now that
This patch continues my series of copy-edits to the GCC user
documentation. Here I've fixed a number of problems in extend.texi with
confusion between which and that, as I previously did for invoke.texi.
Committed as obvious since there are no changes to content, just grammar.
-Sandra
The demangler change was handling the tags in the wrong place; I'm
writing them out with unqualified names, so the demangler should expect
them in the same place.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
commit 75eef303e5494f27a6d9bbef68aaf3200978a8f1
Author: Jason Merrill
As mentioned in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Cxx11AbiCompatibility, C++11
changes the return type of complex::real and imag, leading to a binary
incompatibility between C++98 and C++11 code if the functions are used
without inlining. This patch adds an ABI tag to the C++11 variants so
that they
I've checked in this patch to fix various problems with hyphenated
phrases in extend.texi. This exactly parallels similar copy edits I
made earlier this year to invoke.texi. To recap, in phrases like
64-bit types, 64-bit is a compound adjective phrase that immediately
precedes a noun and
I've checked in this patch to consistently use bit-field in
extend.texi instead of bitfield or bit field. Bit-field is listed
in the GCC Coding Conventions as the preferred terminology, for
consistency with the C and C++ standards.
-Sandra
2012-11-10 Sandra Loosemore
I found this suspicious looking line in cp/parser.c () while looking at
__thread and thread_local.
Look at the patterns of the if blocks above the line in question to verify.
Built and tested on x86_64-linux.
Ed
2012-11-11 Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net
* parser.c
28 matches
Mail list logo
