Re: Wonly-top-basic-asm

On 2/26/2016 7:09 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 02/21/2016 11:27 AM, David Wohlferd wrote: So now what? I have one Bernd who likes the sample, and one who doesn't. Obviously I think what I'm proposing is better than what's there now and I've done my best to say why. But me believing it to be

Re: [PATCH] [RFA] [PR tree-optmization/69740] Schedule loop fixups when needed

On 02/28/2016 02:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 9:48 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:

[PATCH][ARM] PR target/70008

This patches address PR 70008, where a reverse subtract with carry instruction can be generated in thumb2 mode. It was tested with no regressions in arm and thumb modes on the following targets: arm-none-linux-gnueabi arm-none-linux-gnuabihf armeb-none-linux-gnuabihf arm-none-eabi Okay for

Re: [RFC][PATCH][PR63586] Convert x+x+x+x into 4*x

That looks better, but I think the unordered_remove will break operand sorting and thus you probably don't handle x + x + x + x + y + y + y + y + y + y + z + z + z + z optimally. I'd say you simply want to avoid the recursion and collect a vector of [start, end] pairs before doing any

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/69961 (invalid ctor call with dependent args)

OK. Jason

Re: [PING^3][PATCH, 12/16] Handle acc loop directive

On 22-02-16 11:57, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:54:46AM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: Following up on your suggestion to implement this during gimplification, I wrote attached patch. I'll put it through some openacc testing and add testcases. Is this approach acceptable for

[PATCH] teach mklog to look in the current directory for ChangeLog files

From: Trevor Saunders when run in repos other than gcc mklog fails to find ChangeLog files because it looks for $0/../$dir/ChangeLog, but of course if the diff is for a project other than gcc that might not exist. It should be fine to also look for

Re: [WWWDocs] Deprecate support for non-thumb ARM devices

On February 28, 2016 3:20:24 PM CST, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >On Wed, 24 Feb 2016, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: >> I propose to commit this patch later this week. > >+ Support for revisions of the ARM architecture prior to ARMv4t >has >+ been deprecated and will

[wwwdocs] PATCH for Re: Please remove mirror2.babylon.network

On Sun, 28 Feb 2016, NOC wrote: > Due to reorganization of the mirror servers we will be taking the > following mirror offline. Could you please remove it from the list? > > http://mirror2.babylon.network/gcc/ | ftp://mirror2.babylon.network/gcc/ > | rsync://mirror2.babylon.network/gcc/ Thank

[wwwdocs] Fix doc link to x86 built-in functions in gcc-4.8/changes.html

Somehow X86 apparently was changed to x86 at one point, breaking this link. Fixed thusly. Gerald Index: gcc-4.8/changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.8/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.136 diff -u -r1.136

Re: [wwwdocs] Describe behavior of -flifetime-dse in class constructors

On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Martin Liška wrote: > That's a suggestion for changes.html. > > Ready to be installed? Works for me, Martin, but please give Jason a day or two to comment. Thanks, Gerald

Re: [WWWDocs] Deprecate support for non-thumb ARM devices

On Wed, 24 Feb 2016, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > I propose to commit this patch later this week. + Support for revisions of the ARM architecture prior to ARMv4t has + been deprecated and will be removed in a future GCC release. + This affects ARM6, ARM7 (but not ARM7TDMI),

Re: [PATCH] [RFA] [PR tree-optmization/69740] Schedule loop fixups when needed

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 9:48 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >>> On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote: So I fail to see how

[wwwdocs] Fix reference to Andreas Bauer's thesis (readings.html)

Committed. Gerald Index: readings.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/readings.html,v retrieving revision 1.244 diff -u -r1.244 readings.html --- readings.html 28 Feb 2016 19:55:15 - 1.244 +++ readings.html

Re: [PATCH][PR tree-optimization/69270] Exploit VRP information in DOM

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/14/2016 11:14 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >> >> On 01/14/2016 12:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 08:46:43AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:38:52AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:

[wwwdocs] readings.html -- remove broken link to PDP-11 FAQ

Not sure we should carry anything PDP-11 these days, I doubt anyone is really using this or spending time. Anyway, this link is gone and I couldn't find what appears to be an immediate replacement. Committed. Gerald Index: readings.html

[wwwdocs] extensions.html - colberg.org/gcc-lua/ now uses https

Applied. Gerald Index: extensions.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/extensions.html,v retrieving revision 1.56 diff -u -r1.56 extensions.html --- extensions.html 28 Jun 2015 16:02:25 - 1.56 +++ extensions.html

[wwwdocs] gcc-4.6/porting_to.html -- lists.fedoraproject.org is on https now

This is the only reference to lists.fedoraproject.org that I found via http; all others already are https. Committed. Index: gcc-4.6/porting_to.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.6/porting_to.html,v retrieving revision

[wwwdocs] Update link to ThreadSanitizer

This wasn't strictly broken, but redirects to a new address; still makes sense to follow that. Applied. Gerald Index: gcc-4.8/changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.8/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.135 diff

[PATCH] Fix PR c++/69961 (invalid ctor call with dependent args)

In r233563 (where I applied the 2nd version of the fix for PR c++/68948) I shouldn't have reverted the original fix because it is still required for diagnosing an invalid constructor call with dependent arguments (because in that case we delay further processing of the call until instantiation).

Re: *ping* [patch, fortran] Two associate fixes in dump-parse-tree.c

On 02/28/2016 03:42 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > I wrote: > > Patch at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00941.html > >> OK for trunk? >> >> Regards >> >> Thomas >> >> 2016-02-14 Thomas Koenig >> >> * dump-parse-tree.c (show_code_node): Print

Re: *ping* [patch, Fortran] Fix PR fortran/68147, temporaries for allocatable strings

On 02/28/2016 03:39 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > I wrote: > >> So, OK for these branches? > > Patch at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01364.html > > Regards > > Thomas >> >> 2016-02-18 Thomas Koenig >> >> PR fortran/68147 >> PR

Re: [PATCH][SPARC] sparc: switch -fasynchronous-unwind-tables on by default.

> In sparc systems glibc uses libgcc's unwinder to implement the > backtrace(3) function, defaulting to a simple non-dwarf unwinder if > libgcc_s doesn't provide a working _Unwind_Backtrace. > > However, libgcc's unwinder uses .eh_frame instead of .frame_debug, and > .eh_frame is fully populated

New Swedish PO file for 'gcc' (version 6.1-b20160131)

Hello, gentle maintainer. This is a message from the Translation Project robot. A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted by the Swedish team of translators. The file is available at: http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/sv.po (This file, 'gcc-6.1-b20160131.sv.po',

Re: [PATCH] [RFA] [PR tree-optmization/69740] Schedule loop fixups when needed

On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 3:59 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 02/25/2016 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> >>> >>> So I fail to see how only successor edges are relevant. Isn't the >>> important >>> case to

Re: [PATCH PR69652, Regression]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Thanks Richard for your comments. > I changes algorithm to remove dead scalar statements as you proposed. > > Bootstrap and regression testing did not show any new failures on x86-64. > Is it OK for trunk? > >

Re: [ping] Enable -mstackrealign with SSE on 32-bit Windows

> No idea. To me it sounds that -mincoming-stack-boundary=2 would allow to do > -mstackrealign in those functions where it is necessary rather than in all. That's not my reading of ix86_minimum_incoming_stack_boundary: /* Prefer the one specified at command line. */ if

*ping* [patch, fortran] Two associate fixes in dump-parse-tree.c

I wrote: Patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00941.html OK for trunk? Regards Thomas 2016-02-14 Thomas Koenig * dump-parse-tree.c (show_code_node): Print association list of a block if present. Handle EXEC_END_BLOCK.

*ping* [patch, Fortran] Fix PR fortran/68147, temporaries for allocatable strings

I wrote: So, OK for these branches? Patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg01364.html Regards Thomas 2016-02-18 Thomas Koenig PR fortran/68147 PR fortran/47674 * frontend-passes.c (realloc_string_callbac): Don't set