On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 06:55:13PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jul 2013, Marek Polacek wrote:
I've created a new branch, called ubsan for work being done for
Undefined Behavior Sanitizer.
Mind documenting this in http://gcc.gnu.org/svn.html? Let me
know if you need help
This patchlet has print_c_tree use non-static local variable for its
pretty-printer object. The code is much simpler that way.
(A follow up will add destructor so we stop leaking storage.)
Tested on an x86_64-suse-linux. Applied to trunk.
-- Gaby
2013-08-05 Gabriel Dos Reis
From: Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:33:30 -1000
On 07/30/2013 03:31 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
2013-07-30 Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
* config/sparc/sparc.c (sparc_emit_membar_for_model) SMM_TSO: Add
the implied StoreLoad barrier for atomic
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013, Marek Polacek wrote:
Sure, does this patch look ok?
Looks good, thanks!
Gerald
This patch stops the gimple printer from using global pretty printers.
Applied to trunk.
-- Gaby
2013-08-05 Gabriel Dos Reis g...@integrable-solutions.net
* gimple-pretty-print.c (buffer): Remove.
(initialized): Likewise.
(maybe_init_pretty_print): Likewise.
Hi
The patch reassociates X == CST1 || X == CST2 if popcount (CST2 - CST1) == 1
into ((X - CST1) ~(CST2 - CST1)) == 0.
Bootstrap on x86-64 and ARM chromebook.
No make check regression on x86-64 and panda board.
For some targets/options, the (X == CST1 || X == CST2) might be converted
to if (x
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@arm.com wrote:
Hi
The patch reassociates X == CST1 || X == CST2 if popcount (CST2 - CST1) == 1
into ((X - CST1) ~(CST2 - CST1)) == 0.
Bootstrap on x86-64 and ARM chromebook.
No make check regression on x86-64 and panda board.
Same topics as from previous patch; this time for the graphiz outputter.
-- Gaby
2013-08-05 Gabriel Dos Reis g...@integrable-solutions.net
* graph.c (init_graph_slim_pretty_print): Remove.
(print_graph_cfg): Do not call it. Use local pretty printer.
Looking at gfc_class_initializer, I have the impression that it does not
handle initialization of unlimited polymorphic variables/components. I don't
know whether initialization is permitted, but my feeling is that the
following should work:
type t
class(*), pointer :: x
end type t
PR 57708 is a bug where peep2_find_free_register is incorrectly
returning a register that clobbers an unsaved callee saved register.
The problem is due to the way it validates register liveness: only the
first register in the list is fully validated. In this particular case
the problem is that
Hi,
This is a really convenient option, thanks for working on it.
I can't approve it as I'm not a maintainer, but it looks ok to me,
except fot a small nitpicking: afair, comments should end with
dot-space-space.
Michael
On 04 Aug 20:01, Xinliang David Li wrote:
The attached is a new patch
Hi,
The following test case fails to compile on Android: gcc.dg/torture/pr56407.c
/tmp/ccA08Isw.o:pr56407.c:function test: error: undefined reference to 'rand'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Which is not surprising at all, since the testcase has only the
declarations of abort() and
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@arm.com wrote:
Hi
The patch reassociates X == CST1 || X == CST2 if popcount (CST2 - CST1) == 1
into ((X - CST1) ~(CST2 - CST1)) == 0.
Bootstrap on x86-64 and
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 11:30:01PM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
[ Adding Benjamin, Diego, Lawrence ]
General remarks first:
When we designed the coding standards for GCC, an overriding
philosophy was that we did not want to be prescriptive. Rather, we
explicitly wanted to encourage
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 12:24:32PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
Where are the SAVE_EXPRs coming from? It doesn't seem to me that x
needs to be wrapped in a SAVE_EXPR at all in this case. For cases
where the SAVE_EXPR is needed and not used in the test, you could
add the SAVE_EXPR before the
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
2013-08-01 Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com
Steven Bosscher ste...@gcc.gnu.org
* cfgrtl.c (fixup_bb_partition): New routine.
On Aug 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/7/15 1:43 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Could you please repost the patch with its description? This thread
is sufficiently old and noisy that I'm not even sure what the patch
does nor why.
Taking the same example
[ sorry for the dup ]
On Aug 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/7/15 1:43 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Could you please repost the patch with its description? This thread
is sufficiently old and noisy that I'm not even sure what the patch
does nor why.
The patch looks OK to me in general (I can not approve it).
Still have one question...
+
+/* Ensure that no cold bbs dominate hot bbs along the dominance or
+ post-dominance DIR, for example as a result of edge weight insanities.
+ Returns the updated value of COLD_BB_COUNT and adds
On 13/8/5 10:06 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Aug 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/7/15 1:43 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Could you please repost the patch with its description? This thread
is sufficiently old and noisy that I'm not even sure what the patch
...just about time for another ping on GCC caller instrumentation:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg7.html
Thanks,
Paul
On 07/10/2013 04:43 PM, wrote:
Ping,
The updated patch that I have sent here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg7.html
is still pending
Ping?
Ping^2
Thanks,
Kyrill
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Kyrylo Tkachov
Sent: 23 July 2013 10:09
To: 'Richard Sandiford'
Cc: gcc-patches; mi...@it.uu.se; 'Richard Biener'
Subject: RE:
On Aug 5, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/8/5 10:06 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Aug 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/7/15 1:43 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Could you please repost the patch with its description? This
David == David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com writes:
David GDB 7.0 onwards supports hooks written in Python to improve the
David quality-of-life within the debugger. The best known are the
David pretty-printing hooks [1], which we already use within libstdc++ for
David printing better
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
[…]
Note that as per
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01365.html
we'll use pass_manager rather than pipeline, so this would look
like:
pass_manager get_passes () { gcc_assert (passes_); return *passes_;
On 13/8/5 下午10:24, Mike Stump wrote:
On Aug 5, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/8/5 10:06 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Aug 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/7/15 1:43 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Could you please repost the
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
The patch looks OK to me in general (I can not approve it).
Still have one question...
+
+/* Ensure that no cold bbs dominate hot bbs along the dominance or
+ post-dominance DIR, for example as a result of edge weight
Hi,
our handling of local flag (that define where register passing convention will
be used)
is somewhat off. First we clear it on all functions that have call across
partitions
and we also clear it on partial cgraph boundaries.
Fixed both,
Bootstrapped/regtested ppc64-linux, comitted.
PR
I was creating the const char type in a wrong way. I should've used
build_qualified_type, otherwise we'd ICE in the C++ FE later on due to
mismatched TYPE_CANONICALs...
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to ubsan branch.
2013-08-05 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* ubsan.c
On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 08:39 -1000, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 08/02/2013 02:48 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
+pass_manager::gt_ggc_mx ()
+{
+ ::gt_ggc_mx (all_passes);
+ ::gt_ggc_mx (all_small_ipa_passes);
+ ::gt_ggc_mx (all_lowering_passes);
+ ::gt_ggc_mx (all_regular_ipa_passes);
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has about 73 boolean parameters/knobs (defined
in ix86_tune_features[],
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
Hi, GCC/i386 currently has
thanks. Updated patch attached.
David
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 3:57 AM, Michael V. Zolotukhin
michael.v.zolotuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
This is a really convenient option, thanks for working on it.
I can't approve it as I'm not a maintainer, but it looks ok to me,
except fot a small
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 01:12:41PM +0200, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
Hi Martin,
I have applied the patch on top of r201441 and I still get the warning for
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_48.f90 with -m32 -O(2|s):
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/class_48.f90: In function
On 08/05/2013 05:18 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
So I *think* the most efficient traversal is to do this first (with a
suitable comment):
for (int i = passes_by_id_size ; i 0; )
::gt_ggc_mx (passes_by_id[--i]);
That ought to visit all of the passes without triggering recursion
(unless
On 08/04/2013 11:40 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
*recog.c (peep2_find_free_register): Validate all regs in a
multi-reg mode.
Bootstrapped on x86_64.
Ok for trunk and 4.8? (4.7 is also affected, but I don't know of any
back-end relies on this at that point).
Ok.
r~
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 06:59 -1000, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 08/05/2013 05:18 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
So I *think* the most efficient traversal is to do this first (with a
suitable comment):
for (int i = passes_by_id_size ; i 0; )
::gt_ggc_mx (passes_by_id[--i]);
That
comma comma comma comma comma comma
got it ;-)
Hi,
PR 58041 is a misalignment bug caused by replace_ref in
gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c because it does not make sure that the
MEM_REFs it creates has the proper alignment encoded in them.
I'd like to fix this with the patch below, which basically does the
same thing SRA does, it is only
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com
Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net writes:
On Aug 4, 2013, at 8:14 AM, Chung-Lin Tang clt...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On 13/7/15 1:43 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Could you please repost the patch with its description? This thread
is sufficiently old and noisy that I'm not even sure what the patch
Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
PR 58041 is a misalignment bug caused by replace_ref in
gimple-ssa-strength-reduction.c because it does not make sure that the
MEM_REFs it creates has the proper alignment encoded in them.
I'd like to fix this with the patch below, which basically does
ok -- makes sense. This can be done as a follow up patch.
thanks,
David
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:59 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun,
On 5/08/2013, at 10:57 PM, Alexander Ivchenko wrote:
Hi,
The following test case fails to compile on Android: gcc.dg/torture/pr56407.c
/tmp/ccA08Isw.o:pr56407.c:function test: error: undefined reference to 'rand'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Which is not surprising at
This patch fixes up the vget_lane RTL patterns to better
exploit the behaviour of their target instructions, and
to allow variants keeping the result in the SIMD register file.
We patch up aarch64_get_lane_unsigned. These are somewhat
misleading and are not being used in their full capacity.
On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 15:41 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/26/2013 09:04 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
This patch is the hand-written part of the conversion of passes from
C structs to C++ classes. It does not work without the subsequent
autogenerated part, which is huge.
[ ... ]
With the
On 08/04/2013 07:45 PM, Adam Butcher wrote:
What should I do about the symtab nullptr issue?
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg00043.html) Should I
leave the workaround in my patch set as a standalone commit to be
remedied later or should I try to squash it? Or is the hack
OK.
Jason
Hello,
Any comments?
(patch is here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01315.html)
Cheers,
Oleg
On Sat, 2013-07-27 at 14:52 +0200, Oleg Endo wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 08:51 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
BTW: I am not c++ expert, but doesn't c++ offer some sort of
On 07/27/2013 02:52 AM, Oleg Endo wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
* recog.h (rtx (*insn_gen_fn) (rtx, ...)): Replace typedef with
new class insn_gen_fn.
* expr.c (move_by_pieces_1, store_by_pieces_2): Replace
argument rtx (*) (rtx, ...) with insn_gen_fn.
* genoutput.c
Janus Weil wrote:
Ok for trunk?
Sorry for the belated review.
+ bool ptr = sym-attr.pointer || sym-attr.allocatable
+|| (sym-ts.type == BT_CLASS
+ CLASS_DATA (sym)-attr.class_pointer);
That looks quite imbalanced. Why do you not take care of
This looks almost ready to commit. Some comments below:
Once this is committed, you should write a blurb in GCC's home page
describing the contribution.
===
--- libgcc/vtv_start_preinit.c (revision 0)
+++
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 11:42 -1000, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 07/27/2013 02:52 AM, Oleg Endo wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
* recog.h (rtx (*insn_gen_fn) (rtx, ...)): Replace typedef with
new class insn_gen_fn.
* expr.c (move_by_pieces_1, store_by_pieces_2): Replace
argument rtx
Hi,
I have been investigating this very old and very weird issue where we
wrongly reject:
class Foo
{
int u, v, w, x;
typedef struct Bar { } Bar;
virtual void foo(void) {
struct Bar bar;
}
};
46206.C: In member function ‘virtual void Foo::foo()’:
46206.C:6:12: error: using typedef-name
On 08/05/2013 12:32 PM, Oleg Endo wrote:
Thanks, committed as rev 201513.
4.8 also has the same problem. The patch applies on 4.8 branch without
problems and make all-gcc works.
OK for 4.8, too?
Hum. I suppose so, since it's relatively self-contained. I suppose the
out-of-tree openrisc
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 15:24 -0700, Diego Novillo wrote:
This looks almost ready to commit. Some comments below:
[...]
+/* Definition of this optimization pass. */
+
+struct gimple_opt_pass pass_vtable_verify =
+{
+ {
+ GIMPLE_PASS,
+ vtable-verify, /* name
On 08/05/2013 06:46 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
and after this comment, both pairs of qualify_lookup are called in that
order. Thus I started seriously suspecting that something may be wrong
in the if-else above, that is, that we really want something with
iter-type *before* iter-value there too:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
The patch looks OK to me in general (I can not approve it).
Still have one question...
+
+/* Ensure that no cold bbs dominate hot bbs along the
Hi Joey,
Attached patch is a backport to support cortex-r7 in gcc command line.
Tested and it works.
Is it OK to commit?
BR,
Terry
2013-08-05 Terry Guo terry@arm.com
Backport from mainline r197153
2013-03-27 Terry Guo terry@arm.com
*
OK to embedded 4.8 branch.
-Original Message-
From: Terry Guo
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 11:59
To: Joey Ye
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [arm-embedded] Request to back port Cortex-R7 option support
patch
Hi Joey,
Attached patch is a backport to support cortex-r7 in
This patch ports messages to the new dump framework, specifically those
involving missing/mismatched/corrupted profile data, indirect call
promotions performed, and inlines. For the inline messages, I ported
Dehao's patch from the google branches that enables printing call chain
information.
I
61 matches
Mail list logo
