Re: (Non-)offloading diagnostics

Hi! On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:18:31 +0300 (MSK), Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > A very similar problem also exists for nvptx offloading (Nathan CCed), > > where we emit similar warnings (enabled by default). As nvptx offloading > >

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Un-XFAIL ssa-dom-cse-2.c for most platforms

On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 01:13:28PM +, Alan Lawrence wrote: > ...the test passes with --param sra-max-scalarization-size-Ospeed. > > Verified on aarch64 and with stage1 compiler for hppa, powerpc, sparc, s390. How did you test this on s390? For me, the test still fails unless I add

Re: [PING][PATCH] Mark symbols in offload tables with force_output in read_offload_tables

On 25/01/16 14:27, Ilya Verbin wrote: Hi! On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 15:56:15 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: diff --git a/gcc/lto-cgraph.c b/gcc/lto-cgraph.c index 62e5454..cdaee41 100644 --- a/gcc/lto-cgraph.c +++ b/gcc/lto-cgraph.c @@ -1911,6 +1911,11 @@ input_offload_tables (void)

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Fix import of wide character related symbols in stdlib.h wraper

On 26/01/16 06:40 +0200, Andris Pavenis wrote: include/c_compatibility/stdlib.h imports wide character related symbols into global namespace unconditionaly which causes libstdc++-v3 build to fail when one or both of _GLIBCXX_USE_WCHAR_T and _GLIBCXX_HAVE_MBSTATE_T are not defined. Included

Re: Wonly-top-basic-asm

On 01/26/2016 01:29 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: In my opinion we should not warn for any asm that means the same both as basic and as extended asm. The problem then becomes, what *is* the meaning of a basic asm, what does it clobber. I think this may be too hard to figure out in general

[Fortran, gcc-5, patch, pr69268, v1] [5 Regression] Sourced allocation calls function twice

Hi all, please find attached a patch to solve the issue of evaluating a source= expression of an allocate() twice in gcc-5. The patch is a combination and partial back port of several prs of the mainline (namely, but not the complete list: pr44672, pr65548). The patch needed the counts of

Re: Speedup configure and build with system.h

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote: > >> This patch caused bootstrap failure on non-c++11 bootstrap compiler >> [1], e.g. CentOS 5.11. >> >> The problem is with std::swap, which was defined in header >> until c++11

Re: [PATCH] pr69477 - attribute aligned documentation misleading

On 01/25/2016 11:13 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The attached patch adjusts the documentation of attribute aligned and attribute pack so as to prevent misreading the text of the former attribute as if it had read: Specifying attribute aligned for struct and union types is equivalent to

Re: Patch RFA: Add option -fcollectible-pointers, use it in ivopts

On 01/25/2016 05:03 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 01/23/2016 12:52 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: 2016-01-22 Ian Lance Taylor * common.opt (fkeep-gc-roots-live): New option. * tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c

Re: [PATCH] jit: Fix missing references to pthread in jit-playback.c

On 26 January 2016 at 01:33, David Malcolm wrote: > > On Sat, 2016-01-23 at 19:08 +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I noticed when building from 2016-01-17 snapshot that the JIT frontend > > failed to build. > > > > --- > > jit-playback.c:2075:36: error:

(Non-)offloading diagnostics (was: [hsa 0/10] Merge of HSA branch)

Hi! On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:51:48 +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:46:45PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:17:58PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: > > > [...] There are no failing > > > testcases if HSA is not configured. If it is,

Re: (Non-)offloading diagnostics (was: [hsa 0/10] Merge of HSA branch)

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > A very similar problem also exists for nvptx offloading (Nathan CCed), > where we emit similar warnings (enabled by default). As nvptx offloading > happens during link-time (not compile-time, as with hsa offloading), > these don't affect GCC's compile

Re: [PATCH] PR other/69006: fix extra newlines after diagnostics (v2)

On 01/25/2016 09:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote: Here's an updated version of the patch. Thanks! Instead of testing one particular kind of output via a plugin, this version of the patch adds code to gcc-dg-prune to issue a FAIL for any testcase containing blank lines, with a new

[PATCH] Fix PR69452

The following fixes PR69452 - we were using dom order to hoist stmts and PHIs and expected that to preserve proper def order. That obviously doesn't work - the following makes us use RPO order instead. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2016-01-26 Richard

Re: [PATCH, PR69110] Don't return NULL access_fns in dr_analyze_indices

On 24/01/16 09:04, Richard Biener wrote: On January 23, 2016 7:44:23 PM GMT+01:00, Sebastian Pop wrote: On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Tom de Vries wrote: That was my original patch, and Richard commented: 'I think avoiding a NULL access_fns is

[PATCH] Fix PR69467

The following guards X * CST CMP 0 similar to how we guarded other compare patterns. Yuri confirmed this solves the performance regression observed. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. 2016-01-26 Richard Biener PR middle-end/69467

Re: [PATCH] Fix handling of ZERO_EXTRACT lhs with REG_EQUAL note in the combiner (PR target/69442)

On 01/26/2016 09:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: PR target/69442 * combine.c (combine_instructions): For REG_EQUAL note with SET_DEST being ZERO_EXTRACT, also temporarily set SET_DEST to the underlying register. * doc/rtl.texi (REG_EQUAL): Document the

[IA-64] Fix ICE on gcc.dg/vect/vect-cond-11.c

I happened to note that there is an ICE in the C testsuite on IA-64 and that it is trivial to fix, so here is the result. Tested on ia64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline and 5 branch as obvious. 2016-01-26 Eric Botcazou * config/ia64/ia64.c

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/69496 (ICE on VLA in constexpr function)

On 01/26/2016 04:02 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: The (invalid) testcase was causing an ICE because we were passing the result of array_type_nelts_top immediately into tree_int_cst_lt, but for VLAs, the result doesn't have to be a constant. Fixed by evaluating the bound of the array so that we're

Re: [Patch,tree-optimization]: Add new path Splitting pass on tree ssa representation

On 01/18/2016 02:13 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: -Original Message- From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com] Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 12:03 PM To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; Richard Biener Cc: GCC Patches; Vinod Kathail; Shail Aditya Gupta; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala

Re: Suspicious code in fold-const.c

On 01/22/2016 04:03 AM, Richard Biener wrote: My guess is this is probably suppose to be && ! VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (tem, 1))) && ! VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (TREE_OPERAND (tem, 2))) but I'm not sure. Any guesses whats intended here? Not sure, it might be to detect some of

Re: [C/C++ PATCH] Don't emit invalid VEC_COND_EXPR for vector comparisons (PR c/68062)

Ping. On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:11:52PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > > The C front-end changes are OK. > > Jason, is the C++ part of this patch here > > (which is

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Don't mark targets of unconditional jumps with side effects as FALLTHRU.

On 01/22/2016 12:44 AM, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 01/22/2016 12:10 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/21/2016 03:05 AM, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 01/02/2016 08:16 PM, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: When an unconditional jump with side effects targets an immediately following label, rtl_tidy_fallthru_edge

Re: [wwwdocs][PATCH] Add notes on -Wmisleading-indentation to GCC 6 porting guide

On 01/26/2016 01:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html is looking rather empty right now. The attached patch starts fleshing it out by adding some notes on -Wmisleading-indentation. [see the notes at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-01/msg00224.html on what

Re: Suspicious code in fold-const.c

On 01/22/2016 10:21 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 01/22/2016 02:37 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: /* If the initializer is non-void, then it's a normal expression that will be assigned to the slot. */ (*) if (!VOID_TYPE_P (t)) (*) return RECURSE (t); I suspect

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] Fix g++.dg/pr67989.C test failure when running with -march or -mcpu

Ping? On Monday, January 18, 2016 11:33:47 AM Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 06:39:20 PM Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > On 01/12/2016 08:55 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: > > > On Monday, January 11, 2016 04:57:18 PM Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > >> On 01/08/2016 10:33 AM, Thomas

Re: NetBSD has SSP in libc

On 01/23/2016 02:52 PM, Thomas Klausner wrote: NetBSD has SSP included in libc: http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libc/ssp/?only_with_tag=MAIN gcc/configure does not know about this. The attached patch (against SVN checkout from today) fixes this. I've previously reported this as

Re: RFA: Fix for cygwin/mingw PR 66655

On 01/26/2016 07:34 AM, Nick Clifton wrote: Hi Guys, The patch below is offered as a fix for PR 66655. In testing it appears that the patch does work, and does not break building libstdc++-v3 for cygwin or mingw. (Unlike the earlier version...) Due to my brain being so small, I

Re: NetBSD has SSP in libc

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:35:15PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/23/2016 02:52 PM, Thomas Klausner wrote: > >NetBSD has SSP included in libc: > > > >http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libc/ssp/?only_with_tag=MAIN > > > >gcc/configure does not know about this. The attached patch (against

Re: new port: vn8

Hello Mike Stump, Thanks for your comment. I'll remove all of redundant code for this target. I wonder that what paper is? Is it an introduction about new feature in our target? On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:53 AM, Mike Stump wrote: > I don’t see the point of

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69336

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:08:17AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > The following patch enhances the recent change to DOMs memory reference > value-numbering to cover PR69336 (all handled components instead of > just ones with outermost ARRAY_REF). > > Bootstrapped and tested on

Re: [PATCH] fix #69317 - [6 regression] wrong ABI version in -Wabi warnings

On 01/25/2016 09:56 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: Ping: I'm looking a review/approval of the almost trivial patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01206.html On 01/16/2016 05:42 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: While adding an ABI warning in the patch for bug 69277 I noticed that the

Re: [Patch,tree-optimization]: Add new path Splitting pass on tree ssa representation

On 01/18/2016 11:27 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: Ajit, can you confirm which of adpcm_code or adpcm_decode where path splitting is showing a gain? I suspect it's the former but would like to make sure so that I can adjust the heuristics properly. I'd still like to have this answered when

Re: [PATCH] PR target/68986: [5/6 Regression] internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Stack alignment adjustment for __tls_get_addr should be done in > ix86_update_stack_boundary, not ix86_compute_frame_layout. Also > there is no need to over-align stack for __tls_get_addr and function > with __tls_get_addr

[PATCH] Fix handling of ZERO_EXTRACT lhs with REG_EQUAL note in the combiner (PR target/69442)

Hi! In the middle of last year, Kugan has defined REG_EQUAL notes even for the case when SET_DEST of the single set is ZERO_EXTRACT, before that I believe it has been defined only for REG/SUBREG and STRICT_LOW_PART thereof. But, like for STRICT_LOW_PART, the REG_EQUAL note describes the whole

Re: [PATCH] ARM PR68620 (ICE with FP16 on armeb)

Hi Christophe, On 20/01/16 21:10, Christophe Lyon wrote: On 19 January 2016 at 15:51, Alan Lawrence wrote: On 19/01/16 11:15, Christophe Lyon wrote: For neon_vdupn, I chose to implement neon_vdup_nv4hf and neon_vdup_nv8hf instead of updating the VX iterator

Re: [PATCH] Handle -fsanitize=* in lto-wrapper (PR lto/69254)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 01:54:52PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 01/25/2016 09:30 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > >Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? > > I've been staring at it for a while, and on the whole I think I can make > sense of this. However - it does

Re: Patch RFA: Add option -fcollectible-pointers, use it in ivopts

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > >>> On 01/23/2016 12:52 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >>> 2016-01-22 Ian Lance Taylor * common.opt (fkeep-gc-roots-live): New option. * tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (add_candidate_1): If

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Put back the 's' output modifier

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > It turns out the 's' output modifier is used in some glibc math code, > and is in an installed header even. So let's put it back, it is much > less of a burden supporting it a bit longer than to deal with

[C++ PATCH] Handle error_mark_node in cp_fold (PR c++/68357)

Hi! Some errors (e.g. in in this particular PR in a backend machine builtin) are detected only during folding and the recursive cp_fold* call can then return error_mark_node. Passing that to fold_build*_loc is undesirable though, the gimplifiers as well as other places in the compiler don't

Re: [PATCH] Handle -fsanitize=* in lto-wrapper (PR lto/69254)

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > Here is an attempt to handle -f{,no-}sanitize= options in LTO wrapper. > In addition to that I've noticed ICEs e.g. if some OpenMP code is compiled > with -c -flto -fopenmp, but final link is -fno-openmp, similarly for > openacc, -fcilkplus is

Re: [PING][PATCH] Mark symbols in offload tables with force_output in read_offload_tables

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 25/01/16 14:27, Ilya Verbin wrote: > > Hi! > > > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 15:56:15 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > > > > diff --git a/gcc/lto-cgraph.c b/gcc/lto-cgraph.c > > > > index 62e5454..cdaee41 100644 > > > > --- a/gcc/lto-cgraph.c > > > > +++

[PATCH] Fix up ICE with initializer containing address of invalid var (PR tree-optimization/69483)

Hi! If as in the testcase below a VAR_DECL has error_mark_node type (and that unfortunately happens (and has to) quite late, at the end of parsing the TU), canonicalize_constructor_val can ICE on that, because it will try to fold convert something to error_mark_node type. Fixed by giving up in

Re: [PATCH] Handle -fsanitize=* in lto-wrapper (PR lto/69254)

On 01/26/2016 02:24 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: just designed to enable DEF_SANITIZER_BUILTIN (IIUC). Also, why use shift and not just sanitize=undefined? Because -fsanitize=undefined is a large collection of individual sanitizers, and at least some of them affect also post-IPA code (e.g.

[committed, PATCH] Remove -m32 from gcc.target/i386/pr68986-2.c

Index: ChangeLog === --- ChangeLog (revision 232829) +++ ChangeLog (working copy) @@ -1,5 +1,9 @@ 2016-01-26 H.J. Lu + * gcc.target/i386/pr68986-2.c: Remove -m32. + +2016-01-26 H.J. Lu

RFA: Fix for cygwin/mingw PR 66655

Hi Guys, The patch below is offered as a fix for PR 66655. In testing it appears that the patch does work, and does not break building libstdc++-v3 for cygwin or mingw. (Unlike the earlier version...) Due to my brain being so small, I have already checked the patch in, without

Re: [PATCH] Handle -fsanitize=* in lto-wrapper (PR lto/69254)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:06:43PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? > > Can you split out the non -fsanitize part? It is ok. Ok, I've committed following patch: 2016-01-26 Jakub Jelinek PR

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Add vector permute cost

ping From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 16 December 2015 11:37 To: Richard Biener; James Greenhalgh Cc: GCC Patches; nd Subject: RE: [PATCH][AArch64] Add vector permute cost Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, James Greenhalgh >

[AArch64] Disable pcrelative_literal_loads with fix-cortex-a53-843419

Hi, This is a followup to PR63304. As discussed in bugzilla, this patch disables pcrelative_literal_loads when -mfix-cortex-a53-843419 (or its default configure option) is used. I copied the behavior of -mfix-cortex-a53-835769 (e.g. in aarch64_can_inline_p), and I have tested by building the

Re: [AArch64] Disable pcrelative_literal_loads with fix-cortex-a53-843419

With the attachment On 26 January 2016 at 15:42, Christophe Lyon wrote: > Hi, > > This is a followup to PR63304. > > As discussed in bugzilla, this patch disables pcrelative_literal_loads > when -mfix-cortex-a53-843419 (or its default configure option) is > used.

Re: [AArch64] Disable pcrelative_literal_loads with fix-cortex-a53-843419

On 26/01/16 14:42, Christophe Lyon wrote: Hi, This is a followup to PR63304. As discussed in bugzilla, this patch disables pcrelative_literal_loads when -mfix-cortex-a53-843419 (or its default configure option) is used. I copied the behavior of -mfix-cortex-a53-835769 (e.g. in

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Add vector permute cost

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:35:45AM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > Add support for vector permute cost since various permutes can expand into a > complex > sequence of instructions. This fixes major performance regressions due to > recent changes > in the SLP vectorizer (which now vectorizes

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit fp, #12 (default -mfloat128 on PowerPC-Linux)

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Michael Meissner wrote: > This is the final patch (at least so far) that turns on -mfloat128 by default > for PowerPC Linux systems where the VSX instruction set is enabled. As I > mentioned in the last email, because we don't build

Re: [PATCH] ARM PR68620 (ICE with FP16 on armeb)

On 26 January 2016 at 14:20, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi Christophe, > > On 20/01/16 21:10, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> >> On 19 January 2016 at 15:51, Alan Lawrence >> wrote: >>> >>> On 19/01/16 11:15, Christophe Lyon wrote: >>> >> For

Re: [C PATCH] Fix -Wunused-function (PR debug/66869)

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > The early-debug changes moved warnings about unused functions into cgraph. > The problem is that if we have just unused declarations, they aren't > sometimes even registered with cgraph and therefore we no longer

Re: [PATCH] Fix up ICE with initializer containing address of invalid var (PR tree-optimization/69483)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > If as in the testcase below a VAR_DECL has error_mark_node type > (and that unfortunately happens (and has to) quite late, at the end of > parsing the TU), canonicalize_constructor_val can ICE on that, because it >

Re: [PATCH] PR other/69006: fix extra newlines after diagnostics (v2)

On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 12:18 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 01/25/2016 09:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > Here's an updated version of the patch. > > Thanks! > > > Instead of testing one particular kind of output via a plugin, > > this version of the patch adds code to gcc-dg-prune to issue a >

Re: [PATCH] Handle -fsanitize=* in lto-wrapper (PR lto/69254)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:06:43PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > I'm somewhat confused about that you drop -fsanitize options from > the LTO options section writing in lto-opts.c but then add code to > parse it from there in lto-wrapper.c. The code there also looks Sorry, as I said to Bernd,

Re: [PATCH] PR c++/69399: Add HAVE_WORKING_CXX_BUILTIN_CONSTANT_P

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:25 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 7:55 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> Without the fix for PR 65656, g++ miscompiles

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Fix PR target/69245 Rewrite arm_set_current_function

Hi Christian, On 26/01/16 15:29, Christian Bruel wrote: On 01/25/2016 05:37 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: So this is ok for trunk with the testcase changed as discussed above and using -O2 optimisation level and with a couple comment fixes below. Hi Kyrill, I realized afterwards that my

Re: Patch RFA: Add option -fcollectible-pointers, use it in ivopts

On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 05:35 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: [...] > Index: common.opt > === > --- common.opt (revision 232580) > +++ common.opt (working copy) > @@ -1380,6 +1380,10 @@ > Enable hoisting adjacent loads to encourage

[Patch AArch64] Restrict 16-bit sqrdml{sa}h instructions to FP_LO_REGS

Hi, In their forms using 16-bit lanes, the sqrdmlah and sqrdmlsh instruction available when compiling with -march=armv8.1-a are only usable with a register number in the range 0 to 15 for operand 3, as gas will point out: Error: register number out of range 0 to 15 at operand 3 --

Re: Wonly-top-basic-asm

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 01:11:36PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 01/26/2016 01:29 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > >In my opinion we should not warn for any asm that means the same both > >as basic and as extended asm. The problem then becomes, what *is* the > >meaning of a basic asm, what

Re: [PATCH] PR c++/69399: Add HAVE_WORKING_CXX_BUILTIN_CONSTANT_P

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > Somehow PR 65656 miscompiled: > > > > if (STATIC_CONSTANT_P (xi.precision > HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) > > ? xi.len == 1 && xi.val[0] >= 0 > > : xi.precision <= HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) > > > > which turned

Re: [C PATCH] Fix -Wunused-function (PR debug/66869)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:21:08PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > --- gcc/c/c-decl.c.jj 2016-01-21 00:41:47.0 +0100 > > +++ gcc/c/c-decl.c 2016-01-25 16:36:31.973504082 +0100 > > @@ -10741,11 +10741,19 @@ c_write_global_declarations_1 (tree glob > >if (TREE_CODE (decl) ==

[PATCH] Fix PR c++/69139 (deduction failure with trailing return type)

This patch makes the parser more robust in determining whether an 'auto' specifier that appears in a parameter declaration corresponds to a placeholder for a late return type, or corresponds to an implicit template parameter as for an abbreviated function template. Bootstrap + regtest in progress

[C++ PATCH] Handle error_mark_node in cp_fold (alt; PR c++/68357)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Another alternative would be to make sure tree folders don't introduce > error_mark_node (if it wasn't there already), but instead fold the call say > to build_int_cst (returntype, 0). The known cases that would need to change > are

Re: Speedup configure and build with system.h

Hi, On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > Meh. Can you try the attached patch with a configure test (it > > includes the generated files)? It works for me with 4.3.4, and should > > make your build include always. > > Yes, this patch works for me and allows bootstrap with gcc-4.1.2

Re: [PATCH, PR69110] Don't return NULL access_fns in dr_analyze_indices

Tom de Vries wrote: > diff --git a/gcc/tree-data-ref.c b/gcc/tree-data-ref.c > index a40f40d..4c29fc2 100644 > --- a/gcc/tree-data-ref.c > +++ b/gcc/tree-data-ref.c > @@ -1510,8 +1510,9 @@ initialize_data_dependence_relation (struct > data_reference *a, >if (operand_equal_p (DR_REF (a),

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Fix PR target/69245 Rewrite arm_set_current_function

On 26/01/16 16:56, Christian Bruel wrote: On 01/26/2016 04:58 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Christian, On 26/01/16 15:29, Christian Bruel wrote: On 01/25/2016 05:37 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: So this is ok for trunk with the testcase changed as discussed above and using -O2 optimisation

[PR69315] enable finish_function to recurse for constexpr functions

We don't want finish_function to be called recursively from mark_used. However, it's desirable and necessary to call itself recursively when performing delayed folding, because that may have to instantiate and evaluate constexpr template functions. So, arrange for finish_function to accept being

Re: [PATCH, 69217]: [6 Regression] ICE at var-tracking.c:5038 Segmentation fault

On Jan 23, 2016, Iain Buclaw wrote: > PR rtl-optimization/69217 > * var-tracking.c (tracked_record_parameter_p): Don't segfault if there > are no TYPE_FIELDS set for the record type. This looks good to me, thanks. -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter

[PR 69355] Correct hole detection when total_scalarization fails

Hi, PR 69355 has revealed that when SRA attempts total scalarization of an aggregate but this fails because the user type-casts a scalar field and stores into a it a smaller aggregate (and the scalar field is not written to, whether directly or as a part of an aggregate store), the pass can loose

Re: Patch RFA: Add option -fcollectible-pointers, use it in ivopts

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 8:03 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > > Is the patch missing some logic to make the option be enabled by default > for gc-using languages? (presumably go, and maybe java?) I am intentionally leaving that to a separate patch, yes. I think this option is

[trans-mem, committed] Fix 60908

Just a silly think-o in building the tm region tree, which resulted in the one region being found twice. r~ PR middle-end/60908 * trans-mem.c (tm_region_init): Mark entry block as visited. testsuite/ * gcc.dg/tm/pr60908.c: New test. diff --git

Re: [Fortran, gcc-5, patch, pr69268, v1] [5 Regression] Sourced allocation calls function twice

Dear Andre, The patch looks fine to me. OK for 5-branch. Thanks for the patch. Paul On 26 January 2016 at 13:28, Andre Vehreschild wrote: > Hi all, > > please find attached a patch to solve the issue of evaluating a source= > expression of an allocate() twice in gcc-5. The patch

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Add TARGET_IRA_CHANGE_PSEUDO_ALLOCNO_CLASS

ping (note the regressions discussed below are addressed by https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01761.html) From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 17 December 2015 13:37 To: James Greenhalgh Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; nd Subject: RE: [PATCH][AArch64] Add

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Enable fusion of AES instructions

ping > -Original Message- > From: Wilco Dijkstra [mailto:wilco.dijks...@arm.com] > Sent: 19 November 2015 18:12 > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: [PATCH][ARM] Enable fusion of AES instructions > > Enable instruction fusion of AES instructions on ARM for Cortex-A53 and >

[PATCH] Fix up wi::lrshift (PR c++/69399)

Hi! On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > Somehow PR 65656 miscompiled: > > > > if (STATIC_CONSTANT_P (xi.precision > HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) > > ? xi.len == 1 && xi.val[0] >= 0 > > : xi.precision <= HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) > > > > which

Re: [PATCH] Fix up wi::lrshift (PR c++/69399)

On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote > The question is, shall we do what wi::lshift does and have the fast path > only for the constant shifts, as the untested patch below does, or shall we > check shift dynamically (thus use > shift < HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT >

Re: [C++ PATCH] Handle error_mark_node in cp_fold (alt; PR c++/68357)

On Jan 26, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> Another alternative would be to make sure tree folders don't introduce >> error_mark_node (if it wasn't there already), but instead fold the call say >> to

[PATCH] Partial fix for PR target/68662

Hi! As Alan mentioned in the PR, there is some other issue still around, but by the time I've noticed that, I already had this patch being bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64{,le}-linux (which just passed). Ok for trunk and deal with the rest incrementally? 2016-01-26 Jakub Jelinek

Re: [PATCH] Fix up wi::lrshift (PR c++/69399)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:00:52AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote > > The question is, shall we do what wi::lshift does and have the fast path > > only for the constant shifts, as the untested patch below does, or shall we > > check

Re: [PATCH] Partial fix for PR target/68662

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > As Alan mentioned in the PR, there is some other issue still around, but > by the time I've noticed that, I already had this patch being > bootstrapped/regtested on powerpc64{,le}-linux (which just passed). > Ok for

Re: PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class

On 12/14/2015 05:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: + if (abi_version_at_least (10)) +TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD (t) = is_really_empty_class (t); This should use is_empty_class or CLASSTYPE_EMPTY_P. We don't want to change how classes with just a vptr are passed. Otherwise, it looks OK to me. Jason

Re: [C++ PATCH] Handle error_mark_node in cp_fold (PR c++/68357)

On 01/26/2016 08:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: PR c++/68357 * cp-gimplify.c (cp_fold): If some operand folds to error_mark_node, return error_mark_node instead of building trees with error_mark_node operands. OK. Jason

[patch] libstdc++/69478 Fix assertions for move assignment of trivial types

The PR shows that we are incorrectly asserting that types are copy-assignable when we are going to move-assign them. Tested powerpc64-linux, committed to trunk. Branch commits to follow shortly. commit d11631c7c7f6630e83fdbe7f8e16f55eea2dd773 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

Re: PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 12/14/2015 05:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> + if (abi_version_at_least (10)) >> +TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD (t) = is_really_empty_class (t); > > > This should use is_empty_class or CLASSTYPE_EMPTY_P. We don't want to >

Re: [PATCH] Fix up wi::lrshift (PR c++/69399)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:00:52AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote >> > The question is, shall we do what wi::lshift does and have the fast path >> > only

RFA (tree.c): PATCH for c++/68782 (wrong TREE_CONSTANT flag on C++ CONSTRUCTOR)

The problem in this bug was that the constexpr code builds a lot of CONSTRUCTORs and then fills in the elements later without ever going back and updating TREE_CONSTANT and TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS. This patch adds middle end functions recompute_constructor_flags and verify_constructor_flags, and

Re: [PATCH] Fix up wi::lrshift (PR c++/69399)

Jakub Jelinek writes: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:00:52AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote >> > The question is, shall we do what wi::lshift does and have the fast path >> > only for the constant shifts, as the

Re: PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 12/14/2015 05:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: + if (abi_version_at_least (10)) +TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD (t) = is_really_empty_class (t); This should use is_empty_class or

Re: PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: >>> >>> On 12/14/2015 05:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: + if (abi_version_at_least (10)) +

Re: RFA (tree.c): PATCH for c++/68782 (wrong TREE_CONSTANT flag on C++ CONSTRUCTOR)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:20:04PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Are the tree.c changes OK for trunk? The tree.c changes are ok. But I have nits and one bigger issue in constexpr.c: > --- a/gcc/cp/constexpr.c > +++ b/gcc/cp/constexpr.c > @@ -2214,6 +2214,9 @@

[wwwdocs][PATCH] Add notes on -Wmisleading-indentation to GCC 6 porting guide

htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html is looking rather empty right now. The attached patch starts fleshing it out by adding some notes on -Wmisleading-indentation. [see the notes at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-01/msg00224.html on what -Wmisleading-indentation ran into on a mass-rebuild of Debian] I

[Patch, MIPS] Patch for PR 68400, a mips16 bug

Here is a patch for PR6400. The problem is that and_operands_ok was checking one operand to see if it was a memory_operand but MIPS16 addressing is more restrictive than what the general memory_operand allows. The fix was to call mips_classify_address if TARGET_MIPS16 is set because it will do a

Re: PING^1: [PATCH] Add TYPE_EMPTY_RECORD for C++ empty class

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, H.J. Lu wrote: On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: On 12/14/2015 05:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: + if

Re: [PATCH] Fix up wi::lrshift (PR c++/69399)

On January 26, 2016 8:00:52 PM GMT+01:00, Mike Stump wrote: >On Jan 26, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote >> The question is, shall we do what wi::lshift does and have the fast >path >> only for the constant shifts, as the untested patch below does,

Re: RFA (tree.c): PATCH for c++/68782 (wrong TREE_CONSTANT flag on C++ CONSTRUCTOR)

On 01/26/2016 03:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >+ if (CHECKING_P) >+ verify_constructor_flags (t); >+ else >+ recompute_constructor_flags (t); But I don't understand this. Either the flags are supposed to be already correct here, then I'd expect to see if (CHECKING_P)

Re: RFA (tree.c): PATCH for c++/68782 (wrong TREE_CONSTANT flag on C++ CONSTRUCTOR)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:46:50PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 01/26/2016 03:32 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >>>+if (CHECKING_P) > >>>+ verify_constructor_flags (t); > >>>+else > >>>+ recompute_constructor_flags (t); > > >But I don't understand this. Either the flags are

  1   2   >