On 9 October 2014 01:45, Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
Some of the tests have copyright dates of 2012-2014 - I think they
should be just 2014, even if you copied existing files.
Some of them also had 010 as the month. :)
Please break the ChangeLog entries to fit in 80 columns,
The CLZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO macro is harded to return 32. For the
vector intrinsic vclz this is incorrect and should return the value
eight. The CTZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO has the same issue.
Tested on arm-linux-gnueabihf, arm-linux-gnueabi.
2014-10-08 Michael Collison
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Michael Collison
michael.colli...@linaro.org wrote:
The CLZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO macro is harded to return 32. For the vector
intrinsic vclz this is incorrect and should return the value eight. The
CTZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO has the same issue.
Do you have a
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 08:39:40PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
I like it. And one could reasonably argue that now is the time to change
since that maximizes the time for folks to find broken code.
Yep, this is definitely stage1 stuff. We still have a few weeks, but
I wouldn't want to rush such a
Yes this problem was found with Christophe's neon intrinsic tests which
are awaiting approval. The problem was found by passing a value of zero
to the vclz vector intrinsic.
On 10/09/2014 12:11 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Michael Collison
The attached patch prevents libquadmath from installing its info file if the
library is not actually built.
Tested on x86_64-linux, both on a built with libquadmath (normal) and without
(tweaking configure so it thinks _float128 is not supported).
OK to commit?
quadmath.ChangeLog
The attached patch prevents libquadmath from installing its info file if the
library is not actually built.
Tested on x86_64-linux, both on a built with libquadmath (normal) and without
(tweaking configure so it thinks _float128 is not supported).
OK to commit?
Again, with correct
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:27:55AM +0200, FX wrote:
The attached patch prevents libquadmath from installing its info file if
the library is not actually built.
Tested on x86_64-linux, both on a built with libquadmath (normal) and
without (tweaking configure so it thinks _float128 is not
2014-10-09 2:40 GMT+04:00 Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz:
I prevent clone's body from removal and therefore original should call
clone (otherwise clone may have no callers and be removed). I think
call edge may work (need to recall other cases when reference do its
work) but is it OK to have
This fixes an invalid NRV optimization done for returning a
non-automatic var.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2014-10-08 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/61969
* tree-nrv.c (pass_nrv::execute): Properly test for
On 09/10/14 08:05, Michael Collison wrote:
The CLZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO macro is harded to return 32. For the
vector intrinsic vclz this is incorrect and should return the value
eight. The CTZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO has the same issue.
Tested on arm-linux-gnueabihf, arm-linux-gnueabi.
Tejas,
You are correct. I will update the comment.
On 10/9/2014 12:55 AM, Tejas Belagod wrote:
On 09/10/14 08:05, Michael Collison wrote:
The CLZ_DEFINED_VALUE_AT_ZERO macro is harded to return 32. For the
vector intrinsic vclz this is incorrect and should return the value
eight. The
This fixes a bogus strict overflow warning from VRPs
simplify_cond_using_ranges. I believe that when optimizing
equality compares from (T) x != CST to x != (T) CST we do
not have to care about the fact whether the computation of x
possibly overflowed.
Besides that it looks odd that we guard
On 08 Oct 23:02, Petr Murzin wrote:
Hi,
I have measured performance impact on Haswell platform according to this
input:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00978.html
Same in plain text:
For `-O2':
TestPrevious Current Ratio(%)
400.perlbench 46.2000 46.2000 +0%
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 08:10 AM, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
Ok, another try (I don't have write-after-approval, so please commit
the patch once you think it's ok):
Thanks Ville from me too. I'm taking care of the commit with a few very
minor tweaks:
1- In new library testcases we are consistently
2014-10-08 21:50 GMT+04:00 Joern Rennecke joern.renne...@embecosm.com:
As the steering commitee still hasn't spoken on the maintainership issue,
apparently this still has to go the write-after-approval route.
The purpose of this patch is to make it possible to add support for new
devices
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08 Oct 23:02, Petr Murzin wrote:
Hi,
I have measured performance impact on Haswell platform according to this
input:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg00978.html
What about older processors?
The
We are missing documentation for -fsanitize=bool and -fsanitize=enum,
so I've put something together.
Ok for trunk?
2014-10-09 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* doc/invoke.texi: Document -fsanitize=bool and -fsanitize=enum.
diff --git gcc/doc/invoke.texi gcc/doc/invoke.texi
index
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:47:34AM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
We are missing documentation for -fsanitize=bool and -fsanitize=enum,
so I've put something together.
Ok for trunk?
2014-10-09 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* doc/invoke.texi: Document -fsanitize=bool and
PING?
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885 from trunk.
The only change is to use:
for (def_rec = DF_INSN_INFO_DEFS (insn_info); *def_rec; def_rec++)
other than the new FOR_EACH_INSN_INFO_DEF interface.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-SUSE-Linux for both branches.
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:24PM +0800, Felix Yang wrote:
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885 from trunk.
The only change is to use:
for (def_rec = DF_INSN_INFO_DEFS (insn_info); *def_rec; def_rec++)
other than the new FOR_EACH_INSN_INFO_DEF interface.
Ok, thanks for the patch!
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 12:55 PM, FX fxcoud...@gmail.com wrote:
ping
Hi all,
The attached patch improves our code generation for some of the
IEEE_ARITHMETIC functions: some testing functions (is*) and some arithmetic
(logb, rint, scalb, …). The interfaces are
The following fixes PR63380 by making sure to not ignore unused
but possibly trapping stmts when comparing basic-blocks.
Bootstrap / regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2014-10-09 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/63380
*
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:24PM +0800, Felix Yang wrote:
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885 from trunk.
The only change is to use:
for (def_rec = DF_INSN_INFO_DEFS (insn_info); *def_rec; def_rec++)
other than the new FOR_EACH_INSN_INFO_DEF interface.
This fixes SLP vectorization of a MIN/MAX reduction where we choose
a neutral element as the initial value of the first SLP group
member. That's of course wrong. Simply don't choose one in which
case the proper initial values will used.
Bootstrap / regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:04:49AM +, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:24PM +0800, Felix Yang wrote:
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885 from
trunk.
The only change is to use:
for (def_rec = DF_INSN_INFO_DEFS (insn_info);
On 31/07/14 05:47, Jeff Law wrote:
On 06/19/14 14:52, Tom Tromey wrote:
Here's a new version of patch #5.
I've removed the generated code; let's see if it gets through without
compression.
I think this addresses all the reviews:
* It uses gcc-plugin.m4 to disable the plugin
* It does some
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:07:23AM +0100, Phil Muldoon wrote:
2014-06-19 Phil Muldoon pmuld...@redhat.com
Tom Tromey tro...@redhat.com
So my biggest concern here is long term maintenance -- who's going to own
care and feeding of these bits over time.
Sorry for taking so
Hi,
The are two implementations of seq_cost. The function bodies are exactly the
same. The patch removes one of them and make the other global.
Bootstrap and no make check regression on X86-64.
OK for trunk?
Thanks!
-Zhenqiang
ChangeLog:
2014-10-09 Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@arm.com
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:04:49AM +, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:24PM +0800, Felix Yang wrote:
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885 from
trunk.
The only change is to use:
for (def_rec = DF_INSN_INFO_DEFS
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
The are two implementations of seq_cost. The function bodies are exactly the
same. The patch removes one of them and make the other global.
Bootstrap and no make check regression on X86-64.
OK for trunk?
The
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@arm.com
wrote:
Hi,
The are two implementations of seq_cost. The function bodies are exactly the
same. The patch removes one of them and make the
Ping?
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 3:33 PM
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH, C++] Fix PR63366: __complex not equivalent to
__complex double
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:04:49AM +, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:24PM +0800, Felix Yang wrote:
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885
from
trunk.
The only change is to use:
for (def_rec =
OK, I guess I can copy-and-paste reload1.c:spill_failure there.
This generates the same error message than reload1.c:spill_failure (modulo the
class of the spill register, but it's not mentioned in the asm case either).
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, OK for the mainline?
2014-10-09 Eric
Ok, thanks for the patch!
Committed as rev. 216036.
Thanks for the review.
FX
Hello,
This patch adds rest of vpack instruction patterns.
Bootstrapped.
gcc.target/i386.exp tests on top of patch-set show no regressions.
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_insn sse2_avx2_packsswbmask_name): Add masking.
(define_insn
Hello,
This tiny patch extend mulmode insn pattern to support
masking.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_expand mulmode3mask_name): Add masking.
--
Thanks, K
diff --git
Hello,
This patch extends vpalignr insn patterns.
It also introduces dedicated `masked' version of pattern
w/o substing.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator SSESCALARMODE):
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
(another part of the discussion is around
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg02288.html )
Most people who commented seem cautiously in favor. The least favorable
was Ulrich who suggested to go with it but keep the old
Hello,
This tiny patch updates constraints in vec_dup insn
pattern.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_insn vec_dupmode): Update constraints.
--
Thanks, K
diff --git
Version 2 of the patch, now handling the darwin case (thanks Iain) and
expressely noting in the documentation the implications on redistribution
(thanks Joseph).
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-apple-darwin14.
OK to commit?
I need a C/driver options maintainer, or global reviewer, to OK
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Yangfei (Felix) felix.y...@huawei.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:04:49AM +, Yangfei (Felix) wrote:
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:24PM +0800, Felix Yang wrote:
The enclosed patch for 4.8 4.9 branch is a backport of r211885
from
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com wrote:
OK, I guess I can copy-and-paste reload1.c:spill_failure there.
This generates the same error message than reload1.c:spill_failure (modulo the
class of the spill register, but it's not mentioned in the asm case
Hi FX,
On 9 Oct 2014, at 11:39, FX wrote:
Version 2 of the patch, now handling the darwin case (thanks Iain) and
expressely noting in the documentation the implications on redistribution
(thanks Joseph).
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-apple-darwin14.
OK to commit?
I need a
Hello Sterling,
My paper work with the FSF has finished and we can now move
forward with this patch :-)
I rebased the patch on the latest trunk. Attached please find
version 3 of the patch.
And the enclosed patch also includes the two points pointed by
you, do you like it?
The issue is that I cannot reproduce it on the official released branches.
It happens on my local GCC branch (with a new port).
Let's see if the original author of the patch has an testcase.
Zhenqiang, do you have one that can reproduce this bug with the
official 4.8/4.9 branches?
Thanks.
Cheers,
Hello,
This patch extends vpmullw, vpacksdw and pmaddwd
insn patterns.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_c_enum unspec): Add UNSPEC_PMADDWD512.
(define_mode_iterator VI2_AVX2):
On 09 Oct 15:07, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
+(define_insn *mulmode3mask_name
+ [(set (match_operand:VI2_AVX2 0 register_operand =x,v)
+ (mult:VI2_AVX2 (match_operand:VI2_AVX2 1 nonimmediate_operand %0,v)
+(match_operand:VI2_AVX2 2 nonimmediate_operand
xm,vm)))]
+
Hello,
This patch adds support for vpmulhrsw insn.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_insn avx512bw_umulhrswv32hi3mask_name): New.
(define_expand ssse3_avx2_pmulhrswmode3_mask):
On Oct 7, 2014, at 10:28 PM, Jeff Law l...@redhat.com wrote:
It's certainly advantageous for sched2 to split insns that generate multiple
instructions.
So, on my port, I have a load multiple that is just one instruction, and it is
a single clock cycle (to enque it).
On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Hi Christian,
snipped agreed stuf
3) about inlining
I dislike inlining different modes, From a conceptual use, a user
might want to switch mode only when changing a function's hotness.
Usually inlining a cold function into a hot one
Hello,
This patch further extends maxmin patterns.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_insn *codemode3_finitemask_nameround_saeonly_name):
Fix pattern conditions order.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
(another part of the discussion is around
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg02288.html )
Most people who commented seem cautiously in favor. The
Hello,
This obvious patch removes redundant iterator attribute
Bootstrapped.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md (define_mode_attr avx2_avx512f): Remove.
--
Thanks, K
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
index a833cd9..cf415c3 100644
---
Ping.
On 29 Sep 18:02, Ilya Tocar wrote:
Hi,
Currently if call to atexit (lto_wrapper_cleanup) fails we
won't report error as we haven't initialized error-reporting
infrastructure. This patch moves this call after diagnostic_initialize.
I hope that we can't exit inside
Hello,
This patch extends VI mode iterator.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_vector_logical_operator): Handle V16SF and V8DF modes.
* config/i386/sse.md
Hello,
This patch extends pattern for reducation maxmin autogen.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator REDUC_SMINMAX_MODE): Add V64QI and V32HI modes.
--
Thanks, K
diff
But it still needs to be OK'd by either a global reviewer or one of the
listed Darwin maintainers ;) ...
... (ccing Mike)
Duh me. I thought you were a darwin maintainer. Sorry.
FX
Hello,
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(emit_reduc_half): Handle V64QI and V32HI mode.
* config/i386/sse.md
(define_mode_iterator VI_AVX512BW): New.
(define_expand
On 08 Oct 12:26, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 07:14:57PM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
@@ -1296,6 +1297,9 @@ static const char *const standard_startfile_prefix_2
relative to the driver. */
static const char *const tooldir_base_prefix = TOOLDIR_BASE_PREFIX;
+/* A
On 10/09/2014 02:07 PM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
+#ifndef ACCEL_COMPILER
/* We need to check standard_exec_prefix/just_machine_suffix/specs
for any override of as, ld and libraries. */
specs_file = (char *) alloca (strlen (standard_exec_prefix)
+ strlen
Hello,
This patch extends vec_init-related routines/patterns.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_vector_init_duplicate): Handle V64QI and V32HI modes,
update V8HI, V16QI,
Hi,
I think this patch should be split in 2 parts:
V64QI related and non-V64QI related.
This part contains non-V64QI related changes.
Also I've noticed, that not all patterns using VI1_AVX2,
actually have AVX512 versions, so fixed bogus patterns.
On 06 Oct 16:10, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon,
-Original Message-
From: Maciej W. Rozycki [mailto:ma...@codesourcery.com]
To: Ulrich Weigand
Cc: Dharmakan Rohit-B30502; Wienskoski Edmar-RA8797; David Edelsohn; gcc-
patc...@gcc.gnu.org; Alan Modra; Jakub Jelinek
Subject: Re: [RFC: Patch, PR 60102] [4.9/4.10 Regression] powerpc
On 25 September 2014 21:30, Segher Boessenkool
seg...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 10:33:17AM -0700, Michael Collison wrote:
The problem is the CONST_INT 0, not a large constant. This constant is
not accepted by the predicate, but is accepted by the constraint.
Yes, bad
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
(another part of the discussion is around
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-06/msg02288.html )
Most people who
Hi,
After enabling ASan, TSan and UBSan testsuites for installed toolchain,
many tests started to fail. This is caused by wrong logic in {asan,
ubsan, tsan}_finish
functions. Here, restore_ld_library_path is called, that is wrong,
because it drops some env variables ( GCC_EXEC_PREFIX,
Am 08.10.2014 um 09:16 schrieb Richard Biener:
On Tue, 7 Oct 2014, Marek Polacek wrote:
I think it makes sense to do this (and I expect C++ will follow
with defaulting to -std=c++11 once the ABI stuff has settled).
Of course it would be nice to look at the actual fallout in
a
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01812.html
(another part of the discussion is around
On 10/09/2014 05:24 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
ISO C++ forbids declaration of %qs with no type, name);
type = integer_type_node;
+ defaulted_int = 1;
I would think we want to handle this up in the existing defaulted_int block:
/* No type at all: default
OK, thanks.
Jason
On 10/09/14 09:25, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/09/2014 05:24 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
ISO C++ forbids declaration of %qs with no type, name);
type = integer_type_node;
+ defaulted_int = 1;
I would think we want to handle this up in the existing
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in one place; why add the parameter?
Jason
On 10/09/2014 09:30 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+ return typeid (__complex) != typeid (__complex double);
Don't we want this to be '=='?
I think it wants to check for _complex being __complex double, not not
being _complex int (other failure modes exist!)
Right, I was forgetting about
On 10/08/2014 01:30 PM, Fabien Chêne wrote:
2014-10-07 23:13 GMT+02:00 Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com:
It seems to me that the problem is that lookup_and_check_tag is rejecting a
USING_DECL rather than returning it. What if we return the USING_DECL?
If the USING_DECL is returned, the code
On 10/09/2014 08:45 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
What happened to the plans to stabilize the libstdc++ c++11 ABI? Is this still
a target for GCC 5?
Yes.
Jason
rohitarulraj wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Maciej W. Rozycki [mailto:ma...@codesourcery.com]
To: Ulrich Weigand
Cc: Dharmakan Rohit-B30502; Wienskoski Edmar-RA8797; David Edelsohn; gcc-
patc...@gcc.gnu.org; Alan Modra; Jakub Jelinek
Subject: Re: [RFC: Patch, PR 60102]
OK, thanks.
Jason
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 03:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in one place; why add the parameter?
Is also called recursively by check_constexpr_ctor_body_1 and
On 27.09.2014 12:50, Kai Tietz wrote:
Hi Patrick,
the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
already? As I asked an overseer and he didn't found you on the list.
Regards,
Kai
The papers FSF
.. a simple example in C++11 would be:
struct S
{
constexpr S() { { struct T { }; } }
};
Paolo.
It appeared I changed a semantics of BNDMK expand when replaced tree operations
with rtl ones.
Original code:
+ op1 = expand_normal (fold_build2 (PLUS_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (arg1),
+ arg1, integer_minus_one_node));
+ op1 = force_reg (Pmode, op1);
On 09/10/14 12:35, Christian Bruel wrote:
On 10/08/2014 06:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Hi Christian,
snipped agreed stuf
3) about inlining
I dislike inlining different modes, From a conceptual use, a user
might want to switch mode only when changing a function's hotness.
On 10/09/2014 09:49 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 03:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in one place; why add the
parameter?
Is also called
2014-10-09 15:52 GMT+02:00 Patrick Wollgast patrick.wollg...@rub.de:
On 27.09.2014 12:50, Kai Tietz wrote:
Hi Patrick,
the mingw/cygwin part your patch looks fine to me. Nevertheless I
have one question regarding to you. Do you have FSF papers for gcc
already? As I asked an overseer and
This fixes fallout from r216010, which causes Firefox build failures.
Just move the gcc_assert below the new if statement.
Boostrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks.
2014-10-09 Markus Trippelsdorf mar...@trippelsdorf.de
* pa-polymorphic-call.c
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 04:47:05PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
2014-10-09 Markus Trippelsdorf mar...@trippelsdorf.de
* /g++.dg/ipa/polymorphic-call-1.C: New testcase.
Please drop the leading '/' when you commit this patch.
Marek
Hello,
This patch extends autogeneration of SI-2-SF
conversions.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_vector_convert_uns_vsivsf): Handle V16SI mode and
TARGET_AVX512VL.
--
+(define_insn vec_load_lanesoi_lanemode
Best to prepend aarch64_ the pattern name, IMHO, else it looks like a
standard pattern name(eg. vec_load_lanesmn) at first glance.
Otherwise, LGTM(but I can't approve it). Thanks for this patch.
Thanks,
Tejas.
+ [(set (match_operand:OI 0
Hello,
This patch extends movcc/vcond autogen.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/i386.c
(ix86_expand_sse_movcc): Handle V64QI and V32HI mode.
(ix86_expand_int_vcond): Ditto.
--
Thanks, K
On 08/10/14 18:27, charles.bay...@linaro.org wrote:
From: Charles Baylis charles.bay...@linaro.org
This patch replaces the inline assembler implementations of the
vld[234](q?)_lane_* intrinsics with new versions which exploit the new builtin
functions added in patch 1.
Tested (with the rest of
Hello folks,
On 09 Oct 14:57, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
OK, let's go in the proposed way, more detailed:
- we begin with +-*/ of float/double vectors. IMO, this would result
in a
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This patch adds rest of vpack instruction patterns.
Bootstrapped.
gcc.target/i386.exp tests on top of patch-set show no regressions.
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
*
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 04:18 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/09/2014 09:49 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 10/09/2014 03:31 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/08/2014 03:47 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
(check_constexpr_ctor_body): Use it; add bool parameter.
This function seems to only be called in
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This tiny patch extend mulmode insn pattern to support
masking.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 08 Oct 23:02, Petr Murzin wrote:
Hi,
I have measured performance impact on Haswell platform according to this
input:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This patch extends vpalignr insn patterns.
It also introduces dedicated `masked' version of pattern
w/o substing.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This tiny patch updates constraints in vec_dup insn
pattern.
Bootstrapped.
AVX-512* tests on top of patch-set all pass
under simulator.
Is it ok for trunk?
gcc/
* config/i386/sse.md
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
Ping
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
