On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 8:32 PM, DJ Delorie d...@redhat.com wrote:
Given how much trouble I went through to make it the default, I'd
rather not revert all that work... especially since the flag is
*required* for proper operation of the hardware on many of these
targets.
This patch will, or
Am 28.06.2013 17:03, schrieb Dominique Dhumieres:
The following patchlet fixes the ICE for the test case bellow and AFAICT
gives the right error. Regstrapped on x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0.
OK for the trunk?
The patch is okay and sufficiently trivial. Committed as Rev. 200575.
Thanks for the
Hi Andrew,
On Friday 28 June 2013 09:50:31 Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:51 AM, paul_woege...@mentor.com wrote:
Hi,
The patch below provides caller instrumentation for GCC.
The following new options have been added:
-finstrument-calls
Built and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk?
Tobias
2013-07-01 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR fortran/57469
* trans-decl.c (generate_local_decl): Don't warn that
a dummy is unused, when it is in a namelist.
2013-07-01 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR fortran/57469
*
The following patches are pending to be reviewed:
* http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-06/msg00142.html
* http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-06/msg00141.html
* http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-06/msg00132.html
* http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-06/msg00137.html
*
On 01/07/13 08:56, Sofiane Naci wrote:
Hi,
This patch is the part of the ongoing work of ARM instruction classification
cleanup.
This patch moves the Wireless MMX instruction classification into the type
attribute, and removes the wtype attribute.
This has been tested with a full
[Sorry for the delay]
For example, when an expression is evaluated and it's value is assigned
to variable of type short, the generated RTL would look something like
the following.
(set (reg:SI 110)
(zero_extend:SI (subreg:HI (reg:SI 117) 0)))
However, if during value
Hi Richard,
This hurts code size.
Therefore I've disabled the new peephole2 for optimize_insn_for_size_p
so that
the original peephole before r200197 is used when optimising for size.
I've also added a test to confirm that the new peephole2 for the non-CC
setting variants is being
---
You've been invited by Jagdish Rana to use Google Talk.
If you already have a Google account, login to Gmail and accept this chat
invitation:
http://mail.google.com/mail/b-4c557a-713dcda8a3-rU29SiYot59QPn5-hwFBygcW9N0
On 24/06/13 14:28, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:37 PM, Cesar Philippidis
cesar_philippi...@mentor.com wrote:
Here is an updated version of Tom's if-to-switch conversion pass that
was originally posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg01210.html.
I
Hi!
The latest OpenMP 4.0 wording says:
The expressions appearing in the clauses of this directive are evaluated in
the scope of
the arguments of the function declaration or definition.
so the current implementation of parsing all the clauses
at the place where they appear and just don't lookup
On 06/30/2013 09:32 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Given how much trouble I went through to make it the default, I'd
rather not revert all that work... especially since the flag is
*required* for proper operation of the hardware on many of these
targets.
This patch will, or course, silently and
My plan for removal of global variables in gcc 4.9 [1] calls for several
hundred new classes, which will be singletons in a classic monolithic
build, but have multiple instances in a shared-library build.
In order to avoid the register pressure of passing a redundant this
pointer around for the
Hello Everyone,
This patch fixes the issue in PR 57490. The issue was that, the C and
C++ implementation was not handling array notations inside TRUTH_*_EXPR. I
added them and added the .i test case. Is this OK for trunk?
Here are ChangeLog entries:
gcc/c/ChangeLog
+2013-07-01
Hello Everyone,
This patch will fix a buffer overflow issue in a test case shown in PR
57766. I am committing this patch as obvious. I am willing to revert (or
modify) this patch if anyone has objections.
Here is the ChangeLog entry:
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
+2013-07-01 Balaji V. Iyer
Hi,
this is the last part (for now at least!), handling std::list and
ext/vstring.
Tested x86_64-linux, normal/debug/profile.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2013-07-01 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
* include/bits/stl_list.h (list::insert(iterator,
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 04:17:37PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
gcc/c/ChangeLog
+2013-07-01 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
+
The PR c/57490 line belongs to all ChangeLog entries related to the fix, not
just testsuite.
+ * c-array-notation.c
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:24 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 04:17:37PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
OK. The fixed patch is attached. Here are the ChangeLog entries:
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
2013-07-01 Balaji V. Iyer balaji.v.i...@intel.com
Still
PR c/57490
hasn't been added to cp/ChangeLog and c/ChangeLog entries.
---
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 12:24 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490
On
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 1:09 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Rainer Orth
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for PR c/57490
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:02:57PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
OK. The
Hi,
So, something like the patch attached?
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal): Turn
on all -mavx target flags by default as they are dependent
on AVX anyway.
Thanks
Sri
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 11:36 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, I forgot the ChangeLog entries:
gcc/
2013-07-01 David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com
* doc/extend.texi (Type Attributes): Document new force_static
attribute.
gcc/cp/
2013-07-01 David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com
This is it indeed, I am surprised this problem is so old, a Standard
issue perhaps ? If not I might add it to my todo list.
François
On 06/30/2013 09:43 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
.. looks like PR39269, but please double check.
Paolo.
(restarting this thread:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01318.html )
On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 13:51 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 05/23/2013 12:06 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
Another thing I should mention while you're doing all of these static
function
to class member
On 07/01/2013 12:59 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
I tried this approach for tracer, but there were non-trivial differences
between the old and new tracer.o files, enough to make me uncomfortable
with this approach.
Like what? Are these just bugs in the IPA-CP pass failing to propagate? If
so, we
Updated with corrections for previous comments. New patch attached,
but the Changelog is essentially the same.
+/* A unary expression representing a requirement for an expression that
+ can be evaluated at compile time. */
Judging from the implementation, it seems that this relies on the
libitm is currently unconditionally built with -Werror. This patch adds
--enable-werror to control it (enabled by default). Bootstrapped and tested
on x86_64, and inspected build logs to ensure it was doing what it should.
I'm assuming copyright assignment isn't necessary for a small change
libatomic is currently unconditionally built with -Werror. This patch adds
--enable-werror to control it (enabled by default). Bootstrapped and tested
on x86_64, and inspected build logs to ensure it was doing what it should.
I'm assuming copyright assignment isn't necessary for a small change
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Sriraman Tallam tmsri...@google.com wrote:
So, something like the patch attached?
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal): Turn
on all -mavx target flags by default as they are dependent
on AVX anyway.
Yes, but please
Hi Sandra,
good work!
I tested with arm-none-eabi.
Now both variants, with and without -fstrict-volatile-bitfields
produce the expected results for EABI-compliant structures,
and still create reasonable code with non-compliant packed structures.
I think there is still a case where this
On 07/01/2013 09:35 PM, François Dumont wrote:
This is it indeed, I am surprised this problem is so old, a Standard
issue perhaps ? If not I might add it to my todo list.
Yesterday I had a look and I think it's just a bug, I found in Bugzilla
a duplicate too, and another resolved Jon some time
On 01/07/13 14:02, Tom de Vries wrote:
I also dislike the two passes being in early optimizations - that way they
do
not see the effects of IPA inlining / LTO IPA-CP transforms.
I'd rather move
it way down towards RTL expansion (though eventually some may say that
switch-conversion
This patch replaces expand_location_to_spelling_point with
expand_location so that macros will not be expanded.
Bootstrapped and passed regression test.
OK for google-4_8 branch?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/tree-cfg.c
===
---
Hi all,
I've finally reworked the generic lambda patches I made back in 2009
(http://gcc.1065356.n5.nabble.com/lambda-Latest-experimental-polymorphic-lambda-patches-tt713016.html)
to apply against GCC's mainline.
The syntaxes demonstrated by the following examples are supported (as
per the
---
gcc/cp/mangle.c| 2 ++
gcc/cp/parser.c| 43 +--
gcc/cp/semantics.c | 10 +-
3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/mangle.c b/gcc/cp/mangle.c
index 8da62b5..4d4c0fd 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/mangle.c
+++
---
gcc/cp/pt.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
index 3847a1d..fbdd8ec6 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -18847,6 +18847,9 @@ instantiate_decl (tree d, int defer_ok,
tree fn_context;
bool nested;
+ if (TREE_CODE (d) ==
---
gcc/symtab.c | 18 ++
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gcc/symtab.c b/gcc/symtab.c
index 85d47a8..1ada0f7 100644
--- a/gcc/symtab.c
+++ b/gcc/symtab.c
@@ -116,6 +116,15 @@ insert_to_assembler_name_hash (symtab_node node, bool
with_clones)
tree name =
This patch replaces expand_location_to_spelling_point with
expand_location so that macros will not be expanded.
I'm confused. Doesn't this just undo the fix you made a month ago? How
does this not break discriminator assignment?
-cary
---
gcc/cp/decl.c | 1 +
gcc/cp/parser.c | 203 ++--
gcc/cp/pt.c | 7 ++
3 files changed, 206 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
index 047fd77..00bcc35 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++
This patch does not break the regression test. And because the final
assembly is emitted with expand_location instead of
expand_location_to_spelling_point, thus when we check same_line_p,
it should also reflect this.
Dehao
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Cary Coutant ccout...@google.com wrote:
* diagnostic-core.h: Declare dump_backtrace (void).
* diagnostic.c: Define it.
---
Just realized that I've submitted an unintended hunk in [PATCH 3/4]
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg00042.html). I didn't
notice that I'd left a tracing line in 'gcc/cp/decl.c'. This
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:36 AM, David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
My plan for removal of global variables in gcc 4.9 [1] calls for several
hundred new classes, which will be singletons in a classic monolithic
build, but have multiple instances in a shared-library build.
In order to
43 matches
Mail list logo
