On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 02:57:38PM +, rohitarul...@freescale.com wrote:
Source file: gcc-4.8.2/gcc/varasm.c
@@ -7120,7 +7120,7 @@
if (CONSTANT_POOL_ADDRESS_P (symbol))
{
desc = SYMBOL_REF_CONSTANT (symbol);
output_constant_pool_1 (desc, 1);
Quoting Svante Signell (2014-04-24 10:39:10)
On Fri, 2014-04-18 at 10:03 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Samuel Thibault, le Thu 17 Apr 2014 00:03:45 +0200, a écrit :
Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 09 Apr 2014 09:36:42 +0200, a écrit :
Well, the first step is to verify that
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 05:32:54PM -0700, Cong Hou wrote:
In this patch a new reload-rewrite pattern detector is composed to
handle the following pattern in the loop being vectorized:
x = *p;
...
y = *p;
or
*p = x;
...
y = *p;
In both cases, *p is reloaded
Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com writes:
don't you think that it would be easier to understand the number if you
printed it largest index first, as in the routines in wide-int-print.cc?
Yeah, that's what the patch does. E.g. (for 32-bit HWI):
[...,0x3,0x8000]
is 7 31.
Thanks,
Am 12.04.2014 21:33, schrieb Thomas Koenig:
please find attached a patch for PR 59604.
The patch makes sure that, if -fno-range-check is specified,
using int on an overflowing boz constant yields the same
result for compile-time simplification and run-time
execution.
OK for trunk?
Looks good
Another column info improvements, this time for initializer
warnings. warning_init and add_pending_init had to gain new location
parameter.
What is worth mentioning is that the (near initialization for X)
message seems next to useless to me now with caret diagnostics (?).
Regtested/bootstrapped
On 13-03-14 21:49, Richard Henderson wrote:
(define_expand ldexpxf3
- [(set (match_dup 3)
- (float:XF (match_operand:SI 2 register_operand)))
- (parallel [(set (match_operand:XF 0 register_operand)
- (unspec:XF [(match_operand:XF 1 register_operand)
-
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com wrote:
On 13-03-14 21:49, Richard Henderson wrote:
(define_expand ldexpxf3
- [(set (match_dup 3)
- (float:XF (match_operand:SI 2 register_operand)))
- (parallel [(set (match_operand:XF 0 register_operand)
-
Hi,
Attached patch implements TARGET_ATOMIC_ASSIGN_EXPAND_FENV for ARM. With
this, atomic test-case gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c now PASS.
This implementation is based on SPARC and i386 implementations.
Regression tested on qemu-arm for arm-none-linux-gnueabi with no new
regression. Is
Attached patch implements TARGET_ATOMIC_ASSIGN_EXPAND_FENV for AARCH64.
With this, atomic test-case gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c now PASS.
This implementation is based on SPARC and i386 implementations.
Regression tested on qemu-aarch64 for aarch64-none-linux-gnu with no new
regression. Is
±On Sat, 2014-04-26 at 08:53 +0200, Justus Winter wrote:
Quoting Svante Signell (2014-04-24 10:39:10)
On Fri, 2014-04-18 at 10:03 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Samuel Thibault, le Thu 17 Apr 2014 00:03:45 +0200, a écrit :
Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 09 Apr 2014 09:36:42 +0200, a écrit :
On 25-04-14 15:22, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries tom_devr...@mentor.com writes:
diff --git a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
index 45256e9..b61cd44 100644
--- a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
+++ b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c
@@ -7027,11 +7027,17 @@ mips_expand_call (enum
Hello!
2014-04-26 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/alias-30.c (dg-options): Dump only fre1 details.
* gcc.dg/vect/pr60505.c: Cleanup vect tree dump.
* g++.dg/ipa/devirt-27.C (dg-options): Remove -fdump-ipa-devirt.
Committed to mainline and 4.9 branch.
Uros.
Index:
i am sorry, i missed the fact that the loop counts up but you were
reversing the order in the indexes.
kenny
On 04/26/2014 04:26 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Kenneth Zadeck zad...@naturalbridge.com writes:
don't you think that it would be easier to understand the number if you
printed it
this is fine.
kenny
On 04/25/2014 09:44 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
We should write back the sign-extended value.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/wide-int.cc
===
--- gcc/wide-int.cc
Eric,
Honza,
This patch adds analysis in pass_final to track which hard registers are set or
clobbered by the function body, and stores that information in a
struct cgraph_node, to be used in the fuse-caller-save optmization.
This is the updated version of the previously approved patch
2014-03-21 James Greenhalgh james.greenha...@arm.com
* calls.c (initialize_argument_information): Always treat
PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED as 1, simplify code accordingly.
(expand_call): Likewise.
(emit_library_call_calue_1): Likewise.
* expr.c (PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED): Do
Not clear to me, (2U i) should be zero if the shift count is masked.
2U 31 is undefined behavior on those targets.
Precisely not, or else we are not talking about the same notion of masking.
--
Eric Botcazou
Quoting Svante Signell (2014-04-26 13:59:57)
For reference, here are my notes about one of these crashes (Svante,
is this still current?):
Yes it is, thanks for your help so far. Is the rpctrace bug you
mentioned that the wrong ports are reported?
~~~ snip ~~~
[...]
Eric Botcazou writes:
Not clear to me, (2U i) should be zero if the shift count is masked.
2U 31 is undefined behavior on those targets.
Precisely not, or else we are not talking about the same notion of masking.
I believe Jakub is referring to the following in the C standard:
Parallel profiledbootstrap is supported on all maintained releases. So
just remove a misleading outdated sentence, that states the opposite,
from doc/install.texi.
OK for trunk?
Thanks.
2014-04-26 Markus Trippelsdorf mar...@trippelsdorf.de
* doc/install.texi (Building with profile
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 03:30:25PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Not clear to me, (2U i) should be zero if the shift count is masked.
2U 31 is undefined behavior on those targets.
Precisely not, or else we are not talking about the same notion of masking.
Eh, C99, 6.5.7/3:
If the value
On 25/04/14 20:50 -0400, Tim Shen wrote:
* include/bits/regex.tcc (__regex_algo_impl): Remove
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_DFS_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT and use
_GLIBCXX_REGEX_USE_THOMPSON_NFA instead.
* include/bits/regex_automaton.h: Remove quantifier counting variable.
*
OK if bootstrap succeeds?
With testing of the bootstrap build of the patch, I ran into the following
regression compared to a reference bootstrap build without the patch:
...
FAIL: g++.dg/tsan/cond_race.C -O2 output pattern test, is ==3087==WARNING:
Program is run with unlimited stack
On 25/04/14 18:03 -0400, Tim Shen wrote:
* include/bits/regex_executor.h: Add _M_rep_count to track how
many times this repeat node are visited.
is visited not are visited
@@ -151,6 +156,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
// character.
I believe Jakub is referring to the following in the C standard:
Bitwise shift operators
...
Semantics
... If the value of the right operand ... is greater than or equal to the
width of the promoted left operand, the behavior is undefined.
So on 16-bit int systems you can't portably
So, if you have int16 target, where unsigned int is 16-bit and UINT_MAX
65535, then shift count must be = 0 and 16, therefore, 2U 31 is
undefined behavior.
Well, if the shift count is masked by the target, if will be masked according
to the width of the register and the result will
On Sat, 26 Apr 2014, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
Parallel profiledbootstrap is supported on all maintained releases. So
just remove a misleading outdated sentence, that states the opposite,
from doc/install.texi.
OK for trunk?
Okay. If this also applies to GCC 4.9 (which I think is the
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
Successfully generates HTML, info and pdf via appropriate make
invocations; example of resulting HTML can be seen at the bottom of:
http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2014-04-25/Tuple-representation.html
The diagram is split over pages 178-180 of
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote:
+ * opts.c (common_handle_option): Disable -fipa-reference coorectly
+ with -fuse-profile.
coorectly - correctly
Gerald
Hi,
Shall it a good idea to add new warning -Wsizeof-array-argument that
warns when sizeof is applied on parameter declared as an array ?
Similar to clang's -Wsizeof-array-argument:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20110613/042812.html
This was also reported as
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
From all I have seen and heard, this rewrite is a clear improvement
over the status quo. So I am going to review and approve it wearing
my doc maintainer hat, deferring to and relying on Andrew and Richard
and their deep expertise on the technical side.
On Mon, 21 Apr 2014, David Malcolm wrote:
It was pointed out to me off-list that this patch series lacks
documentation changes. I'm working on fixing that, though am not sure I
want to fill everyone inboxes with an updated set of patches yet.
Should I send a combined patch for the
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
Maybe a dumb question (I don't understand a lot of the regex code!)
but is it correct to set this to 1 in the case where
__rep_count.first != _M_current ? Could that result in the count
going downwards from 2 to 1?
34 matches
Mail list logo
