Re: [PATCH] Add constexpr to iterator adaptors, array and range access

On Sat, 2016-07-16 at 00:09 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > This patch implements http://wg21.link/p0031 which adds constexpr to > most operations on std::reverse_iterator, std::move_iterator, > std::array, as well as std::advance, std::distance, and the > range-access functions std::begin,

[PATCH] Add constexpr to iterator adaptors, array and range access

This patch implements http://wg21.link/p0031 which adds constexpr to most operations on std::reverse_iterator, std::move_iterator, std::array, as well as std::advance, std::distance, and the range-access functions std::begin, std::rbegin etc. Strictly speaking, those functions should only be

Re: [PATCH] c++/58796 Make nullptr match exception handlers of pointer type

On 15/07/16 22:53 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 15/07/16 23:36 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:07:03PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: + if (typeid (*this) == typeid(__pointer_type_info)) +{ + *thr_obj = nullptr; + return true; But you

Re: [PATCH] c++/58796 Make nullptr match exception handlers of pointer type

On 15/07/16 23:36 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:07:03PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >+ if (typeid (*this) == typeid(__pointer_type_info)) >+{ >+ *thr_obj = nullptr; >+ return true; But you have the above store too. That doesn't write

Re: [PATCH] c++/58796 Make nullptr match exception handlers of pointer type

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:07:03PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >+ if (typeid (*this) == typeid(__pointer_type_info)) > >+{ > >+ *thr_obj = nullptr; > >+ return true; But you have the above store too. Can't you rethrow_exception in certain threads trying to catch

Re: [PATCH] c++/58796 Make nullptr match exception handlers of pointer type

On 15/07/16 12:47 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/pbase_type_info.cc b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/pbase_type_info.cc index d47fb23..a2993e4 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/pbase_type_info.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/pbase_type_info.cc @@ -38,6 +38,31 @@

[PATCH, rs6000, preapproved] Remove XFAILs from g++.dg/pr70098.C and gcc.target/powerpc/pr71763.c

Hi, A recent patch from Alan Modra removed the need to XFAIL these two test cases. Tested on powerpc64[le]-unknown-linux-gnu, committed to trunk and gcc-6-branch. Thanks, Bill 2016-07-15 Bill Schmidt * g++.dg/pr70098.C: Remove XFAIL for

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Run profile feedback tests with autofdo

> >Not sure what the status for autofdo is in this case. "make check -k" > >is stable for me, but "make check -k -j#" gives unstable result in > >tree-prof.exp tests. Anything I did wrong? > I'm seeing unstable results as well, but haven't dug into it at all. > It's definitely autofdo testing

[PATCH] Replace references to C++0x with C++11 in comments

* include/bits/algorithmfwd.h: Change C++0x to C++11 in comments. * include/bits/move.h: Likewise. * include/bits/postypes.h: Likewise. * include/debug/bitset: Likewise. * include/ext/pb_ds/detail/type_utils.hpp: Likewise. *

Re: [PATCH] Remove redundant std::move in std::for_each

2016-07-15 21:53 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Wakely : > Returning a parameter will try to move anyway, so using std::move here > is redundant (and clang even warns about it being redundant). > > * include/bits/stl_algo.h (for_each): Remove redundant _GLIBCXX_MOVE > and

[PATCH] Remove redundant std::move in std::for_each

Returning a parameter will try to move anyway, so using std::move here is redundant (and clang even warns about it being redundant). * include/bits/stl_algo.h (for_each): Remove redundant _GLIBCXX_MOVE and adjust comment. Tested x86_64-linux, committed to trunk. commit

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Run profile feedback tests with autofdo

On 07/15/2016 02:37 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way? For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said: PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c compilation, -g UNSUPPORTED:

Re: [patch, fortran] PR62125 Nested select type not accepted (rejects valid)

On 07/15/2016 01:35 AM, Mikael Morin wrote: > Le 15/07/2016 à 03:26, Jerry DeLisle a écrit : >> Hit send too soon and forgot to fill out the subject line. Correctly >> given here. >> On 07/14/2016 10:47 AM, Jerry DeLisle wrote: >>> This simple patch kindly provided by Marco solves the problem. >>>

Re: [PATCH testsuite]XFAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr71347 on some targets

On 07/15/2016 08:02 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote: On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 07/14/2016 10:11 AM, Bin Cheng wrote: Hi, Test gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr71347 failed on some targets if the two memory references are re-written into different forms by IVOPT. This could

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Fix {div,mul}kc3-1.c for older hardware

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 11:40:34AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > For the subject tests, I neglected to ensure they would be skipped on > older hardware. This patch fixes that. Tested on > powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu on POWER7 to verify the tests are > unsupported there, and on

[C++ PATCH] Allow frexp etc. builtins in c++14 constexpr (PR c++/50060)

Hi! While in C++11, builtins returning two results, one of them by dereferencing a pointer argument can't be constexpr, in my understanding in C++14 generalized constexprs they can. So, this patch tweaks cxx_eval_builtin_function_call so that it handles how builtins.c folds these builtins (i.e.

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Make the ctr* patterns allow ints in vector regs (PR71763)

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 06:54:44AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > Should we backport this? At least Alan's UNSPEC_DOLOOP part? Alan backported this to 6 (I unfortunately removed gcc-patches from cc:). Segher

C++ PATCH for c++/71092 (ICE with array and constexpr)

Another instance of the problem with our handling of VEC_INIT_EXPR: it isn't expanded until gimplification time, at which point some of the front end information has started to be thrown away. This really needs to be fixed, but in the meantime we can work around the problem like this. Tested

C++ PATCH for c++/71117 (wrong overload resolution with generic lambda)

My fix for add_template_conv_candidate, implementing my suggestion for core 2189, broke calls to a function object that inherits from a generic lambda. The committee hasn't had a chance to consider this issue yet, but for now let's disable the template conversion candidate when there's a viable

Re: [libstdc++] Add C++17clamp

OK for trunk, thanks. I didn't see a feature test in any of the SD-6 papers or P0025. p0096r3 proposes __cpp_lib_clamp = 201603. I added the feature macro and committed the attached as 238383. Thanks, Ed 2016-07-15 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net> Implement C++17

Re: [Fortran, Patch] First patch for coarray FAILED IMAGES (TS 18508)

Third *PING* 2016-07-04 16:46 GMT-06:00 Alessandro Fanfarillo : > * PING * > > 2016-06-21 10:59 GMT-06:00 Alessandro Fanfarillo : >> * PING * >> >> 2016-06-06 15:05 GMT-06:00 Alessandro Fanfarillo : >>> Dear all, >>>

Re: [PATCH GCC]Remove support for -funsafe-loop-optimizations

On July 15, 2016 7:16:42 PM GMT+02:00, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >On 07/15/2016 07:07 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: > >> Bootstrap and test on x86_64. Is it OK? > >If you do this you'll also need to remove the use in config/bfin. OK with that change. Richard. > >Bernd

Re: [PATCH GCC]Remove support for -funsafe-loop-optimizations

On 07/15/2016 07:07 PM, Bin Cheng wrote: Bootstrap and test on x86_64. Is it OK? If you do this you'll also need to remove the use in config/bfin. Bernd

[PATCH GCC]Remove support for -funsafe-loop-optimizations

Hi, This patch removes support for -funsafe-loop-optimizations, as well as -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations. By its name, this option does unsafe optimizations by assuming all loops must terminate and doesn't wrap. Unfortunately, it's not as useful as expected because: 1) Simply assuming loop must

New Swedish PO file for 'gcc' (version 6.1.0)

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-6.1.0.sv.po', has

Re: RFA: new pass to warn on questionable uses of alloca() and VLAs

On 07/11/2016 01:56 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 07/11/2016 09:40 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: On 07/11/2016 11:08 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: Hey, I'm all for different options. It would definitely be easier for me :). I wast trying really hard to use -Wvla= and keep the current -Wvla meaning the

Re: RFA: new pass to warn on questionable uses of alloca() and VLAs

On 07/10/2016 06:09 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 07/08/2016 05:48 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: [New thread now that I actually have a tested patch :)]. ... I have overhauled the options and added extensive documentation to invoke.texi explaining them. See the included testcases. I have tried to

C++ PATCH for c++/71495 (bogus note in SFINAE)

"complain" can be non-zero but not call for any diagnostics. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit 63a7ba56bc105e90e64a8c273d0422d96752ad73 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Thu Jul 14 14:02:57 2016 -0400 PR c++/71495 - spurious note during SFINAE.

C++ PATCH for c++/71511 (ICE on decltype scope in declaration)

Using decltype as the scope of a declaration is ill-formed like using a template parameter, so we just need to add the case. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit 8e3fc6fef25c9ccddea0097216bf2989e10d9cb5 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Thu Jul 14 12:34:28 2016

C++ PATCH for c++/71513 (alignas on member enum)

Thinko in the tsubst_attributes logic. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit 9460ce06baf4d47d44aa7111f991bb50e6644f67 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Thu Jul 14 10:56:25 2016 -0400 PR c++/71513 - alignas on member enum in template * pt.c

C++ PATCH for c++/71604 (type definition in range for)

This was crashing because the binding hijinks we do to handle the range-for-declaration weren't dealing well with a class definition. This patch fixes that, and also adds a diagnostic since that turns out to be ill-formed. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit

C++ PATCHes to mangling of sizeof... and fold-expressions

Investigating the ICE in 71814, I found that we never implemented the specified mangling for sizeof...; sZ for a simple sizeof...(pack) and sP for a more complicated form involving an alias template. So the first patch implements mangling and demangling those forms. Similarly, 71711 shows that

C++ PATCH for c++/71718 (ICE with infinite instantiation and alias template)

When we're trying to die due to excessive template recursion, we shouldn't try to instantiate more templates when printing diagnostics. The code in error.c already checks at_eof to prevent instantiation, so let's just set that appropriately. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. commit

C++ PATCH for c++/70824 (initializer list in template)

Instantiating the compound literal for the underlying array of the initializer list was creating a new variable, so then we would pull out that variables initializer and instantiate that, ad infinitum. We shouldn't need to instantiate the initializer for any artificial variable. Tested

[PATCH, rs6000] Fix {div,mul}kc3-1.c for older hardware

Hi, For the subject tests, I neglected to ensure they would be skipped on older hardware. This patch fixes that. Tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu on POWER7 to verify the tests are unsupported there, and on powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu on POWER8 to verify they still run there. Ok for

[PATCH] Add qsort comparator consistency checking (PR71702)

Hi, this patch adds internal checking for comparator functions that GCC passes to qsort. PR71702 describes an ICE that happens because comparator 'dr_group_sort_cmp' used to be non-transitive in some cases until GCC 6. This patch would uncover that issue on a number of small testcases in GCC's

[patch,avr] make progmem work on AVR_TINY, use TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_DIAGNOSE_USAGE

This patch needs new hook TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_DIAGNOSE_USAGE: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg00839.html This patch turns attribute progmem into a working feature for AVR_TINY cores. It boils down to adding 0x4000 to all symbols with progmem: Flash memory can be seen in the RAM

[PATCH][RFC] PR middle-end/22141 GIMPLE store widening pass

Hi all, This is a GIMPLE pass to implement PR middle-end/22141. that is merge narrow stores of constants into fewer wider stores. A 2009 patch from Jakub [1] contains many testcases but a simple motivating case can be: struct bar { int a; char b; char c; char d; char e; }; //

Re: [PATCH PR71734] Add missed check that reference defined inside loop.

Richard! Did you have a chance to look at this patch? Thanks. Yuri. 2016-07-08 17:07 GMT+03:00 Yuri Rumyantsev : > Hi Richard, > > Thanks for your help - your patch looks much better. > Here is new patch in which additional argument was added to determine > source loop of

Re: [PATCH testsuite]XFAIL gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr71347 on some targets

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/14/2016 10:11 AM, Bin Cheng wrote: >> >> Hi, Test gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr71347 failed on some targets if the two >> memory references are re-written into different forms by IVOPT. This >> could be because of various reasons,

Re: [PATCH] Amend dump expectation in slsr-8.c (PR, tree-optimization/71490)

> On Jul 15, 2016, at 2:24 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 07/14/2016 01:21 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Martin Liška wrote: On

[PATCH, rs6000] Fix vec_construct vectorization cost to be somewhat more accurate

Hi, This patch is a follow-up to Richard's patch of https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg00584.html. The cost of a vec_construct (initialization of an N-way vector by N scalars) is too low, which can cause too-aggressive vectorization in particular for N=8 or higher. Richard changed

[PATCH] Fix PR71893

This PR shows that array_ref_element_size may apply spurious casts which in turn end up confusing VN/PRE. Fixed as follows, bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress. Richard. 2016-07-15 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/71893 *

Re: [PATCH v5] Allocate constant size dynamic stack space in the prologue

On 07/15/2016 02:22 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote: Final version 6 with the stray comment removed (was a harmless oversight). Ok, let's put it in. Bernd

Re: C, C++: Fix PR 69733 (bad location for ignored qualifiers warning)

On 06/22/2016 05:37 AM, Jeff Law wrote: It looks like this stalled... Anyway, it's fine for the trunk. Some of the surrounding code was changed a bit to produce different errors for different C standards, so I had to make an adjustment to the patch. While I was here, I added cdw_atomic to

[PATCH] Fix PR71881

Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2016-07-15 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/71881 * tree-loop-distribution.c (destroy_loop): Remove blocks in reverse DOM order to make debug temp generation happy.

[PATCH] Fix PR71887

Bootstrapped / tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2016-07-15 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/71887 * tree-ssa-phiopt.c (absorbing_element_p): Add rhs arg and verify it is not zero for division / modulo handling.

Re: [PATCH 8/9] shrink-wrap: shrink-wrapping for separate concerns

I still have misgivings about all the changes needed to the following passes, but I guess there's no choice but to live with it. So, I'm trying to look at this patch, but I'm finding it fairly impenetrable and underdocumented. + /* The concerns for which we want a prologue placed on this

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Add support for IPA VRP in ipa-cp/ipa-prop

Hi, thanks for working on extending IPA-CP in this way. I do have a few comments though: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 02:46:50PM +1000, kugan wrote: > Hi, > > This patch extends ipa-cp/ipa-prop infrastructure to handle propagation of > VR. > Thanks, > > Kugan > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > >

Re: [PATCH v5] Allocate constant size dynamic stack space in the prologue

Final version 6 with the stray comment removed (was a harmless oversight). Initial description of the patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg03052.html Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt IBM Germany gcc/ChangeLog * cfgexpand.c (expand_stack_vars): Implement synamic

Re: [PATCH v5] Allocate constant size dynamic stack space in the prologue

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 01:51:51PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 07/14/2016 11:10 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > >- if (flag_stack_usage_info) > >-stack_usage_size += extra; > >+ /*!!!*/ > >+ if (flag_stack_usage_info && pstack_usage_size) > >+*pstack_usage_size += extra; > > What

Re: [PATCH v5] Allocate constant size dynamic stack space in the prologue

On 07/14/2016 11:10 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote: - if (flag_stack_usage_info) -stack_usage_size += extra; + /*!!!*/ + if (flag_stack_usage_info && pstack_usage_size) +*pstack_usage_size += extra; What does the comment mean? Whatever it is needs to be addressed and the comment removed.

[PATCH] c++/58796 Make nullptr match exception handlers of pointer type

This allows exception handlers of pointer and pointer to data members to match exceptions of type std::nullptr_t. Pointers to member functions don't work yet, because a nullptr_t exception object is only a single word, and we need two words for a pointer to member function, and we don't have

Re: [PATCH/AARCH64] Add rtx_costs routine for vulcan.

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:08:11AM +0530, Virendra Pathak wrote: > Hi James/Julian, > > Kindly merge this patch to the trunk. Done as r238372. Thanks, James > >>> gcc/ChangeLog: > >>> > >>> Virendra Pathak > >>> Julian Brown > >>> >

Re: [PATCH][vectorizer][2/2] Hook up mult synthesis logic into vectorisation of mult-by-constant

On 14/07/16 14:31, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Richard, On Thu, 14 Jul 2016, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, On 07/07/16 17:16, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 06/07/16 13:40, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 06/07/16 13:31, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Kyrill, On 05/07/16 12:24, Rainer Orth wrote: Marc Glisse

[PATCH] Some PRE cleanups

Bootstrapped / tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2016-07-15 Richard Biener * tree-ssa-pre.c (get_representative_for): Make sure to return the value number of SSA names. (phi_translate_1): get_representative_for cannot return

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails 03/10] Support epilogues vectorization with no masking

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: > 2016-06-16 9:00 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law : >> On 05/19/2016 01:39 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This patch introduces changes required to run vectorizer on loop epilogue. >>> This also

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails 03/10] Support epilogues vectorization with no masking

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 05/19/2016 01:39 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This patch introduces changes required to run vectorizer on loop epilogue. >> This also enables epilogue vectorization using a vector of smaller size. >> >> Thanks, >>

Re: [C PATCH] For implicit function declaration suggestions only consider fns and fn pointers (PR c/71858)

On 07/14/2016 04:53 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: 2016-07-14 Jakub Jelinek PR c/71858 * c-common.h (enum lookup_name_fuzzy_kind): Add FUZZY_LOOKUP_FUNCTION_NAME. * c-decl.c (implicit_decl_warning): Use FUZZY_LOOKUP_FUNCTION_NAME instead

Re: [RFC, v2] Test coverage for --param boundary values

Martin Liška writes: > This is my second attempt of the patch where I generate all tests on fly. > Firstly, params-options.h is used to generate a list of options in form of: > > "predictable-branch-outcome"=2,0,50 > "inline-min-speedup"=10,0,0 > "max-inline-insns-single"=400,0,0

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails 10/10] Tests

2016-07-14 20:32 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law : > On 07/05/2016 09:44 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This patch adds several tests to check tails vectorization functionality. >> >> Thanks, >> Ilya >> -- >> gcc/testsuite/ >> >> 2016-07-05 Ilya Enkovich

GCC testsuite maintenance (was: [PATCH] Fix OpenACC vector_length parsing in fortran)

Hi! Including in case others also have opinions on "GCC testsuite maintenance". On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:21:13 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:44:25AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Does that me we (erroneously) accept any random

Re: [Fortran, Patch, PR71807, v1] [5/6/7 Regression] Internal compiler error with NULL() reference in structure constructor

Hi Jerry, thanks for the fast review. Committed to trunk as r238368. Regards, Andre On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 10:49:37 -0700 Jerry DeLisle wrote: > On 07/14/2016 09:17 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > attached patch fixes the ICE when assigning null()

Re: [PATCH GCC]Improve loop-niter to handle possible infinite loop.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Bin Cheng

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Disable setting param of __builtin_constant_p to null

> Hi, > > > > VRP assumes that it is run after inlining. Therefore, if there is a > call to __builtin_constant_p with function parameter, it resolve it > to false to avoid bogus warnings. Since we use this as an early vrp > before inling, it leads to wrong code. As a workaround I have >

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Run profile feedback tests with autofdo

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> >> I haven't seen that. Unstable in what way? >> > For GCC doesn't support FDO, it run below tests as you said: >> > >> > PASS: gcc.dg/tree-prof/20041218-1.c compilation, -g >> > UNSUPPORTED:

Re: [patch, fortran] PR62125 Nested select type not accepted (rejects valid)

Le 15/07/2016 à 03:26, Jerry DeLisle a écrit : Hit send too soon and forgot to fill out the subject line. Correctly given here. On 07/14/2016 10:47 AM, Jerry DeLisle wrote: This simple patch kindly provided by Marco solves the problem. Regression tested on x86_64-Linux, Test case provided

Re: [PATCH] zero-length arrays in OpenACC

On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 02:35:44PM -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > This patch teaches c and c++ front ends and omp-low how to deal with > subarray involving GOMP_MAP_FORCE_{PRESENT,TO,FROM,TOFROM} data > mappings. As the libgomp test case shows, it might be possible for a > subarray to have zero

Re: [PATCH PR71503/PR71683]Fix ICE in tree-if-conv.c

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/14/2016 10:12 AM, Bin Cheng wrote: >> >> Hi, >> This is a simple patch fixing ICE in tree-if-conv.c. Existing code does >> not setup a variable (cond) when predicate of basic block is true and it >> asserts on the

Re: [PATCH] Fix OpenACC vector_length parsing in fortran

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 07:05:52PM -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > Is this OK for trunk and gcc6? See other mail for trunk approval, just want to comment on the "and gcc6", it doesn't apply to gcc6, you can add the testcase there, but gcc 6 matches vector_length before vector, the bug has been

Re: [PATCH] Fix OpenACC vector_length parsing in fortran

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:44:25AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Hi! > > On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 19:05:52 -0700, Cesar Philippidis > wrote: > > The fortran FE is currently scanning for the vector clause before > > vector_length. That's a problem match_oacc_clause_gwv

Re: [PATCH] Fix OpenACC vector_length parsing in fortran

Hi! On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 19:05:52 -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > The fortran FE is currently scanning for the vector clause before > vector_length. That's a problem match_oacc_clause_gwv matches 'vector' > without looking for whatever follows it. The correction I made

Re: [v3 PATCH] Fix the constraints for any's assignment operator template to properly reject assignment from a non-copyable lvalue.

On 14/07/16 20:27 +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote: Fix the constraints for any's assignment operator template to properly reject assignment from a non-copyable lvalue. * include/std/any (operator=(_ValueType&&)): Constrain the decayed type for is_copy_constructible, *

Re: [PATCH] Allow fwprop to undo vectorization harm (PR68961)

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > On Sun, 10 Jul 2016, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Richard Biener

Re: [libstdc++] Add C++17clamp

On 14/07/16 19:50 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: Here is an implementation of P0025 An algorithm to "clamp" a value between a pair of boundary values. Testing is almost finished - looks good so far. OK if testing passes? OK for trunk, thanks. I didn't see a feature test in any of the SD-6

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Early VRP Implementation

Hi Andrew, On 15/07/16 17:28, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:08 AM, kugan wrote: Hi Andrew, Why separate out early VRP from tree-vrp? Just a little curious. It is based on the discussion in

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Check for POINTER_TYPE_P before accessing SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO in tree-inline

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:43 AM, kugan wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patch adds check for POINTER_TYPE_P before accessing SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO > in remap_ssa_name in gcc/tree-inline.c. This is not related to IPA_VRP but > was exposed by that. Ok. (before your IPA

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Early VRP Implementation

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:08 AM, kugan wrote: > Hi Andrew, > >> Why separate out early VRP from tree-vrp? Just a little curious. > > > It is based on the discussion in > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-01/msg00069.html. > In summary, conclusion (based on my

Re: [PATCH] Amend dump expectation in slsr-8.c (PR, tree-optimization/71490)

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 07/14/2016 01:21 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> On 07/13/2016 07:21 PM, Jeff Law wrote: Isn't that a code quality regression? So instead

Re: [RFC, v2] Test coverage for --param boundary values

Hi! On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 14:47:46 +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > From f84ce7be4a998089541fb4512e19f54a4ec25cf6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: marxin > Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:59:24 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] Add tests that test boundary values of params This became

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Early VRP Implementation

Hi Andrew, Why separate out early VRP from tree-vrp? Just a little curious. It is based on the discussion in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-01/msg00069.html. In summary, conclusion (based on my understanding) was to implement a simplified VRP algorithm that doesn't require ASSERT_EXPR

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Check for POINTER_TYPE_P before accessing SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO in tree-inline

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 09:47:03PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:43 PM, kugan > wrote: > > This patch adds check for POINTER_TYPE_P before accessing SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO > > in remap_ssa_name in gcc/tree-inline.c. This is not related to

Re: [RFC][IPA-VRP] Check for POINTER_TYPE_P before accessing SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO in tree-inline

Hi Andrew, This patch adds check for POINTER_TYPE_P before accessing SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO in remap_ssa_name in gcc/tree-inline.c. This is not related to IPA_VRP but was exposed by that. SSA_NAME_PTR_INFO should be NULL for non POINTER_TYPE ssa names? Why is it not null in your case? In both