Re: [patch,libgfortran] PR51119 - MATMUL slow for large matrices

Hi Jerry, With these changes, OK for trunk? Just going over this with a fine comb... One thing just struck me: The loop variables should be index_type, so const index_type m = xcount, n = ycount, k = count; [...] index_type a_dim1, a_offset, b_dim1, b_offset, c_dim1, c_offset,

Re: [WIP C++ PATCH] P0217R3 - C++17 structured bindings

Some fixes for bit-field and decltype handling, and address comparison in constant expressions. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applied to trunk. On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On

RFA (openmp): C++ PATCH to make some references TREE_CONSTANT

The standard says that references that refer to a constant address can be used in a constant-expression, but we haven't allowed that. This patch implements it, but without the parser.c hunk it broke libgomp.c++/target-14.C. Apparently the target mapping wants to use 't' in a way that doesn't

Re: [PATCH] df: Change defs in entry and uses in exit block during separate shrink-wrapping

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:09:19AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > So far all target implementations of the separate shrink-wrapping hooks > > use the DF LIVE info to figure out around which basic blocks

Re: Fix PR77881: combine improvement

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 05:56:49AM +0100, Michael Matz wrote: > With this patch there are now no regressions on x86-64-linux (bootstrapped > with all languages+ada). Okay for trunk? I build cross-compilers for this for a whole bunch of archs, and built Linux with that, to see what effect this

[PATCH,rs6000] Add built-in function support for Power9 byte instructions

This patch adds built-in function support for the new setb, cmprb, and cmpeqb Power9 instructions. The patch has been bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64le-unknown-linux and powerpc-unknown-linux (big-endian, with both -m32 and -m64 target options) with no regresions. Is this ok for the

Re: [Patch 5/17] Add -fpermitted-flt-eval-methods=[c11|ts-18661-3]

On 11/14/2016 02:55 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 09:42:32PM -0700, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 11/11/2016 08:37 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi index f133b3a..75ff8ec 100644 --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi +++

[PATCH] libiberty: demangler crash with missing :? or fold expression component.

When construction a :? or fold expression that requires a third expression only the first and second were explicitly checked to not be NULL. Since the third expression is also required in these constructs it needs to be explicitly checked and rejected when missing. Otherwise the demangler will

Re: Go patch committed: copy signal code from Go 1.7 runtime

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:02 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> This patch to the Go frontend and libgo copies the signal code from >> the Go 1.7 runtime. >> >> This adds a little shell script to auto-generate runtime.sigtable from >> the known signal names. >> >> This

Re: [ssa-coalesce] Rename register_ssa_partition

Hi Richard, On 08/11/16 23:45, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 3:32 AM, kugan wrote: Hi, In tree-ssa-coalesce, register_ssa_partition ) and register_ssa_partition_check have lost their meaning over various commits and now just verifies that

Re: [patch,libgfortran] PR51119 - MATMUL slow for large matrices

On 11/13/2016 11:03 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote: Hi Jerry, I think this + /* Parameter adjustments */ + c_dim1 = m; + c_offset = 1 + c_dim1; should be + /* Parameter adjustments */ + c_dim1 = rystride; + c_offset = 1 + c_dim1; Regarding options for matmul: It is

Re: [v3 PATCH] Implement P0513R0, Poisoning the Hash.

On 14 November 2016 at 04:03, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > OK, thanks. This is what I committed after a full testsuite run on Linux-PPC64. 2016-11-14 Ville Voutilainen Implement P0513R0, Poisoning the Hash. *

Re: [v3 PATCH] Implement P0504R0 (Revisiting in-place tag types for any/optional/variant).

On 14 November 2016 at 22:49, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > I needed to do some minor tweaks in > testsuite/20_util/in_place/requirements.cc. I committed the attached > after testing the full suite on Linux-PPC64. P.S. make_unsigned/make_signed tests seem broken.

Re: [v3 PATCH] Implement P0504R0 (Revisiting in-place tag types for any/optional/variant).

On 14 November 2016 at 00:43, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> Oh, they aren't actually constexpr in your patch, so non-const, and so >> don't get internal linkage. But they *should* be constexpr, please add >> that to all three, and add inline to the two variable templates. > P.S.

Re: [libstdc++, testsuite] Add dg-require-thread-fence

On Nov 14, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/newlib/2015/msg00653.html I think that patch is wrong. It is wrong to warn on a system where an empty body is correct. It is wrong to warn when something more than nothing

Re: Default associative containers constructors/destructor/assignment

Any feedback regarding this patch ? François On 02/11/2016 22:37, François Dumont wrote: Hi Here is an updated proposal, I realized that the newly introduced _M_move_data can be also used in the swap implementation. Let me know if you prefer without it or not. François On

Re: [PATCH] warn on overflow in calls to allocation functions (bugs 77531 and 78284)

On 11/13/16, Martin Sebor wrote: > Bug 77531 requests a new warning for calls to allocation functions > (those declared with attribute alloc_size(X, Y)) that overflow the > computation X * Z of the size of the allocated object. > > Bug 78284 suggests that detecting and

Re: [PATCH 04/11] make recog () take a rtx_insn *

Thanks for doing this. tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org writes: > diff --git a/gcc/genrecog.c b/gcc/genrecog.c > index a8e8c22..aa7f629 100644 > --- a/gcc/genrecog.c > +++ b/gcc/genrecog.c > @@ -5102,8 +5102,7 @@ print_subroutine (output_state *os, state *s, int > proc_id) >/* For now, the

Re: [libstdc++, testsuite] Add dg-require-thread-fence

On 14 November 2016 at 18:54, Mike Stump wrote: > On Oct 21, 2016, at 1:00 AM, Christophe Lyon > wrote: >> >> So if we say that the current behaviour has to keep being the default, >> so that users think about what they are really doing, > >

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Make arm_feature_set agree with type of FL_* macros

My apologize, I realized when trying to apply the patch that I wrote it on top of the optional -mthumb patch instead of the reverse. I'll rebase it to not screw up bisect. Best regards, Thomas On 14/11/16 14:47, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 14/11/16 14:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Hi,

Re: [fixincludes] Fix macOS 10.12 and (PR sanitizer/78267)

-7-20161114/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common -I.. -I ../../../../gcc-7-20161114/libsanitizer/include -isystem ../../../../gcc-7-20161114/libsanitizer/include/system -Wall -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wwrite-strings -pedantic -Wno-long-long -fPIC -fno-builtin -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fomit-frame-pointer

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Make arm_feature_set agree with type of FL_* macros

Hi Christophe, No, they were seen when bootstrapping on arm-linux-gnueabihf with the patch to to make -mthumb optional. The patch store flags in an arm_feature_set array and GCC -Wnarrowing complained about the difference of type. Best regards, Thomas On 14/11/16 17:00, Christophe Lyon

Re: [PATCH] Enable Intel AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions

2016-11-11 14:29 GMT+03:00 Jakub Jelinek : > Hi! > > I've noticed preexisting: > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 07:27:00PM +0300, Andrew Senkevich wrote: > >> --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-modes.def >> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-modes.def >> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ VECTOR_MODES (FLOAT, 16);

Re: [PATCH] Enable Intel AVX512_4FMAPS and AVX512_4VNNIW instructions

2016-11-11 14:16 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak : > The x86 part of the patch is OK with the above changes and additional > target attribute test for flags2 ISA features.. Fixed according your comments, I will followup with additional tests soon. -- WBR, Andrew

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wshadow warning in libiberty/cp-demangle.c

On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > We now have -Wshadow=local. So the attached patch uses that for > libiberty. Is the attached patch OK to commit? This is OK. Thanks. Ian

[patch, fortran, committed] Allow dumping of code in Fortran syntax tree

Hello world, I have just committed the attached patch as obvious. No test case, the function is only supposed to be called when debugging the compiler itself. Regards Thomas 2016-11-14 Thomas Koenig * dump-parse-tree.c (show_code): Add prototype.

Re: [PATCH] fix PR sanitizer/78267

Hi Mike, > On Nov 14, 2016, at 8:59 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: >> >>> On 14 Nov 2016, at 16:57, Jack Howarth wrote: >>> >>> The attached patch fixes PR sanitizer/78267 by conditionalizing the >>> include of on the compiler defining __BLOCKS__ as a

Re: [PATCH] fix PR sanitizer/78267

On Nov 14, 2016, at 8:59 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: > >> On 14 Nov 2016, at 16:57, Jack Howarth wrote: >> >> The attached patch fixes PR sanitizer/78267 by conditionalizing the >> include of on the compiler defining __BLOCKS__ as a >> supported

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

On November 14, 2016 4:39:40 PM GMT+01:00, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: >Richard, > >I checked one of the tests designed for epilogue vectorization using >patches 1 - 3 and found out that build compiler performs vectorization >of epilogues with --param vect-epilogues-nomask=1

Re: [libstdc++, testsuite] Add dg-require-thread-fence

On Oct 21, 2016, at 1:00 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > So if we say that the current behaviour has to keep being the default, > so that users think about what they are really doing, Having a toolchain not work by default to force users to think, isn't a winning

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78300 -- class procedure as actual arg

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 06:21:06PM +0100, Janus Weil wrote: > 2016-11-14 16:10 GMT+01:00 Steve Kargl : > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:29:31PM +0100, Janus Weil wrote: > >> > After looking into this a little bit more, I found that the culprit > >> > seems to be

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78300 -- class procedure as actual arg

2016-11-14 16:10 GMT+01:00 Steve Kargl : > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:29:31PM +0100, Janus Weil wrote: >> > After looking into this a little bit more, I found that the culprit >> > seems to be 'resolve_procedure_interface', which does not properly >> > copy the

Re: [PATCH] Add map clauses to libgomp test device-3.f90

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > yesterday I forgot to send out the following patch. The test > libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/examples-4/device-3.f90 was failing > for me when I was testing the HSA branch merge but I believe the test > itself is wrong and the failure is

[PATCH][PPC] Fix ICE using power9 with soft-float

The testcase powerpc/fusion3.c causes an ICE when compiled with -msoft-float. The key line in the testcase looks fairly harmless: void fusion_float_write (float *p, float f){ p[LARGE] = f; } The error message look like this: .../gcc.target/powerpc/fusion3.c: In function

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Make arm_feature_set agree with type of FL_* macros

Hi, On 14 November 2016 at 15:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: > Hi, > > Currently arm_feature_set is defined in gcc/config/arm/arm-flags as an array > of 2 unsigned long. However, the flags stored in these two entries are > (signed) int, being combinations of bits

Re: [PATCH] fix PR sanitizer/78267

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 16:57, Jack Howarth wrote: > > The attached patch fixes PR sanitizer/78267 by conditionalizing the > include of on the compiler defining __BLOCKS__ as a > supported extension. Passes bootstrap on x86_64-apple-darwin15. Okay > for gcc trunk? >

[PATCH] fix PR sanitizer/78267

The attached patch fixes PR sanitizer/78267 by conditionalizing the include of on the compiler defining __BLOCKS__ as a supported extension. Passes bootstrap on x86_64-apple-darwin15. Okay for gcc trunk? 2016-11-14 Jack Howarth libsanitizer/ PR

[PATCH, i386]: Merge some operand constraints

No functional changes. 2016-11-14 Uros Bizjak * config/i386/i386.md (*andndi3_doubleword): Merge operand constraints. (*ashl3_doubleword): Ditto. Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu, committed to mainline SVN. Uros. diff --git

[PATCH] Add map clauses to libgomp test device-3.f90

Hi, yesterday I forgot to send out the following patch. The test libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/examples-4/device-3.f90 was failing for me when I was testing the HSA branch merge but I believe the test itself is wrong and the failure is due to us now adhering to OpenMP 4.5 default mapping of

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

Richard, I checked one of the tests designed for epilogue vectorization using patches 1 - 3 and found out that build compiler performs vectorization of epilogues with --param vect-epilogues-nomask=1 passed: $ gcc -Ofast -mavx2 t1.c -S --param vect-epilogues-nomask=1 -o t1.new-nomask.s

Re: [PATCH 00/11] more rtx_insn * stuff

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:45:40PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 11/14/2016 09:09 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > > From: Trevor Saunders > > > > Hi, > > > > Basically $subject which gets rid of a few more casts over all. > > > > I ment to get this out a

Re: [WIP C++ PATCH] P0217R3 - C++17 structured bindings

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 11:53:10PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 8:05 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 01:24:22PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> >> The

Re: [PATCH 9/9] Add "__RTL" to cc1 (v4)

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:15 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > Changed in this version: > > * Rather than running just one pass, run *all* passes, but start at > the given pass; support for "dg-do run" tests that execute the > resulting code. > * Updated test cases to new

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78300 -- class procedure as actual arg

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:29:31PM +0100, Janus Weil wrote: > > After looking into this a little bit more, I found that the culprit > > seems to be 'resolve_procedure_interface', which does not properly > > copy the 'class_ok' attribute. I propose the attached patch to fix > > this (regtesting

Re: [WIP C++ PATCH] P0217R3 - C++17 structured bindings

On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 11:53:10PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 8:05 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 01:24:22PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> The following patch is a WIP on P0217R3 - decomposition declarations. > >> It contains

Re: [PATCH, GCC] Recognize partial load of source expression on big endian targets

On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: > Hi, > > To fix PR69714, code was added to disable bswap when the resulting symbolic > expression (a load or load + byte swap) is smaller than the source expression > (eg. some of the bytes accessed in the source code gets bitwise ANDed with 0). >

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Make arm_feature_set agree with type of FL_* macros

On 14/11/16 14:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Hi, Currently arm_feature_set is defined in gcc/config/arm/arm-flags as an array of 2 unsigned long. However, the flags stored in these two entries are (signed) int, being combinations of bits set via expression of the form 1 << bitno. This creates

Re: [WIP C++ PATCH] P0217R3 - C++17 structured bindings

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:04:24AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > The match.pd hunk is needed, otherwise the generic folding happily folds > > int arr[2]; > > ... > > auto [ x, y ] = arr; > > == [0] > > into 0, because it

Re: [PATCH 3/9] Introduce emit_status::ensure_regno_capacity

On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 15:17 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 11/11/2016 10:15 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > Link to earlier version of the patch: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00278.html > > Isn't this the same one? > It is; sorry. The rest of the patch kit has changed

Re: [WIP C++ PATCH] P0217R3 - C++17 structured bindings

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> The match.pd hunk is needed, otherwise the generic folding happily folds >> int arr[2]; >> ... >> auto [ x, y ] = arr; >> == [0] >> into 0, because

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Separate shrink wrapping hooks implementation

On 11/11/16 15:31, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 11/11/16 10:17, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 10/11/16 23:39, Segher Boessenkool wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 02:42:24PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:25 AM, Kyrill Tkachov I ran SPEC2006 on a Cortex-A72. Overall scores were

Re: [fixincludes] Fix macOS 10.12 and (PR sanitizer/78267)

Hi Jack, > In case it helps, attached is a diff of the os/trace.h header from OS X 11.11 > vs that > from MacOS X 11.12. It looks like the context of the changes that you are > trying to > apply into are different between the two OS releases and are the cause of the > build > failures on

Re: [PATCH 3/9] Introduce emit_status::ensure_regno_capacity

On 11/11/2016 10:15 PM, David Malcolm wrote: Link to earlier version of the patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00278.html Isn't this the same one? Bernd

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Improve max_insns_skipped logic

Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On 10/11/16 17:19, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Long conditional sequences are slow on modern cores - the value 6 for > max_insns_skipped is a few decades out of date as it was meant for ARM2! > Even with -Os the performance loss for larger values is

Re: [fixincludes] Fix macOS 10.12 and (PR sanitizer/78267)

Hi Jack, > > On darwin15, the proposed patch is insufficient to restore the bootstrap > > (after running genfixes in the fixincludes directory) unless I also apply > > the previously proposed change... > > no wonder: it's only been tested on darwin16. Care to explain what > error you're

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Make arm_feature_set agree with type of FL_* macros

I forgot to mention that this patch is needed for the optional -mthumb patch [1] to bootstrap. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00735.html Best regards, Thomas On 14/11/16 14:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Hi, Currently arm_feature_set is defined in gcc/config/arm/arm-flags

[PATCH, GCC/ARM] Make arm_feature_set agree with type of FL_* macros

Hi, Currently arm_feature_set is defined in gcc/config/arm/arm-flags as an array of 2 unsigned long. However, the flags stored in these two entries are (signed) int, being combinations of bits set via expression of the form 1 << bitno. This creates 3 issues: 1) undefined behavior when

Re: [7/9][AArch64, libgcc] Let AArch64 use customized unwinder file

On 11/11/16 22:12, Joseph Myers wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Jiong Wang wrote: There are two ways of introducing these AArch64 support: * Introducing a few target macros so we can customize functions like uw_init_context, uw_install_context etc. * Use target private unwind-dw2

Re: [PATCH] Support no newline in print_gimple_stmt

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 11/11/2016 01:10 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> I've just noticed that tree-ssa-dse wrongly prints a new line to dump file. >>> For the next stage1,

Re: [Patch, fortran, RFC] Add warning for missing location information

the attached patch runs through gfortran's AST to check for missing location information. ... this time with attachment. 2016-11-14 Thomas Koenig PR fortran/78226 * error.c (gfc_warning_internal): New function. * frontend-passes.c

Re: [PATCH 00/11] more rtx_insn * stuff

On 11/14/2016 09:09 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders Hi, Basically $subject which gets rid of a few more casts over all. I ment to get this out a little while back, but life got busy, and I didn't read the status announcement properly, so

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Richard, > > In my previous patch I forgot to remove couple lines related to aux field. > Here is the correct updated patch. Yeah, I noticed. This patch would be ok for trunk (together with necessary parts from 1 and 2) if all not required parts

[Patch, fortran, RFC] Add warning for missing location information

Hello world, the attached patch runs through gfortran's AST to check for missing location information. If something is found, a warning is issued. I chose not to issue an error because missing location information does not make a program invalid. The patch would cause testsuite regressions

Re: [patch, avr] Add flash size to device info and make wrap around default

Ping! On Thursday 10 November 2016 01:53 PM, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote: On Wednesday 09 November 2016 08:05 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: On 09.11.2016 10:14, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote: On Tuesday 08 November 2016 02:57 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: On 08.11.2016 08:08, Pitchumani

Re: [libstdc++, testsuite] Add dg-require-thread-fence

On 20 October 2016 at 19:40, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 20/10/16 10:33 -0700, Mike Stump wrote: >> >> On Oct 20, 2016, at 9:34 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 20/10/16 09:26 -0700, Mike Stump wrote: On Oct 20, 2016, at 5:20 AM,

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

Richard, In my previous patch I forgot to remove couple lines related to aux field. Here is the correct updated patch. Thanks. Yuri. 2016-11-14 15:51 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener : > On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > >> Richard, >> >> I prepare updated 3 patch with

Re: [PATCH v2] aarch64: Add split-stack initial support

Ping. On 07/11/2016 16:59, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > > > On 14/10/2016 15:59, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >> Hi, >> > > Thanks for the thoughtful review and sorry for late response. > >>> Split-stack prologue on function entry is as follow (this goes before the >>> usual function prologue): >>

Re: [PR target/78213] Do not ICE on non-empty -fself-test

On 11/14/2016 02:20 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:18:02PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 11/11/2016 06:10 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: The problem in this PR is that -fself-test is being run on a non empty source file. This causes init_emit() to run, which sets:

Re: [PR target/78213] Do not ICE on non-empty -fself-test

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:18:02PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 11/11/2016 06:10 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > >The problem in this PR is that -fself-test is being run on a non empty > >source file. This causes init_emit() to run, which sets: > > > >REG_POINTER (virtual_incoming_args_rtx) =

Fwd: failure notice

-- Forwarded message -- From: Date: Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 8:15 AM Subject: failure notice To: howarth.at@gmail.com Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.org. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.

Re: [PR target/78213] Do not ICE on non-empty -fself-test

On 11/11/2016 06:10 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: The problem in this PR is that -fself-test is being run on a non empty source file. This causes init_emit() to run, which sets: REG_POINTER (virtual_incoming_args_rtx) = 1; Setting REG_POINTER on the virtual incoming args, causes /f to be

Re: [RFC][PATCH][AArch64] Cleanup frame pointer usage

ping From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 31 October 2016 18:29 To: GCC Patches Cc: nd Subject: [RFC][PATCH][AArch64] Cleanup frame pointer usage   This patch cleans up all code related to the frame pointer.  On AArch64 we emit a frame chain even in cases where the frame pointer is not required. So

Re: [PATCH v2][AArch64] Fix symbol offset limit

    ping From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 12 September 2016 15:50 To: Richard Earnshaw; GCC Patches Cc: nd Subject: Re: [PATCH v2][AArch64] Fix symbol offset limit     Wilco wrote:    > The original example is from GCC itself, the fixed_regs array is small but > due to > optimization we can end up

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve SHA1 scheduling

ping From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 25 October 2016 18:08 To: GCC Patches Cc: nd Subject: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve SHA1 scheduling     SHA1H instructions may be scheduled after a SHA1C instruction that uses the same input register.  However SHA1C updates its input, so if SHA1H is scheduled after

Re: [PATCH][AArch64 - v3] Simplify eh_return implementation

ping From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 02 November 2016 16:49 To: Ramana Radhakrishnan; GCC Patches Cc: nd Subject: Re: [PATCH][AArch64 - v3] Simplify eh_return implementation       ping From: Wilco Dijkstra Sent: 02 September 2016 12:31 To: Ramana Radhakrishnan; GCC Patches Cc: nd Subject: Re:

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Richard, > > Here is fixed version of updated patch 3. > > Any comments will be appreciated. Looks good apart from + if (epilogue) +{ + epilogue->force_vectorize = loop->force_vectorize; + epilogue->safelen = loop->safelen; +

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote: > Richard, > > I prepare updated 3 patch with passing additional argument to > vect_analyze_loop as you proposed (untested). > > You wrote: > tw, I wonder if you can produce a single patch containing just > epilogue vectorization, that is combine

Re: [PATCH] Don't use priority {cd}tors if not supported by a target (PR, gcov-profile/78086)

PING^1 On 10/31/2016 01:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 10/31/2016 11:07 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> Hi Martin, >> >>> Using priority {cd}tors on a target that does not support that can cause >>> failures (see the PR). >>> Apart from that, I decided to use priority 100 for both gcov_init and >>>

Re: [PATCH] DWARF: make signedness explicit for enumerator const values

On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 12:08 +0100, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote: > Thank you for your answer! > > On 11/10/2016 01:38 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > IMHO having an explicit DW_AT_type pointing at the base type with size > > and encoding for the DW_TAG_enumerator_type is better for consumers than > >

RE: [PATCH 0/3] MIPS/GCC: Changes for `.insn' assembly annotation

On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Matthew Fortune wrote: > At some point in the future we may therefore have to consider backports > of this work to pre-existing GCC releases or a configure time check in > binutils to relax the new checks if GCC does not have the .insn fix. I > don't know how reliable the

[PATCH] remove conditional compilation of HAVE_AS_LEB128 code

From: tbsaunde Last patch I'm squeezing in for stage 1. Jeff approved this back in september, but I never committed it for some reason. So I updated it to trunk, rebootstrapped and regtested and committed it. Thanks! Trev gcc/ChangeLog:

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78300 -- class procedure as actual arg

> After looking into this a little bit more, I found that the culprit > seems to be 'resolve_procedure_interface', which does not properly > copy the 'class_ok' attribute. I propose the attached patch to fix > this (regtesting right now) ... The regtest finished successfully. Is that patch ok for

RE: [PATCH 3/3] MIPS/GCC: Mark trailing labels with `.insn'

Maciej Rozycki writes: > This however requires the correct annotation of branch targets as code, > because the ISA mode is not relevant for data symbols and is therefore > not recorded for them. I wonder if it would have been possible to add the ISA mode to data

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78300 -- class procedure as actual arg

2016-11-14 9:56 GMT+01:00 Janus Weil : > Hi Steve, > >> The attach patch allows a procedure with a class result to >> be an actual argument to subprogram where the dummy argument >> expected to be a class. OK to commit? > > that patch actually does not look quite right to me.

[PATCH] vimrc: fix TAB settings

Hello. Following patch adds TAB settings to contrib/vimrc file. Hope it looks reasonable? Thanks, Martin >From 84eb32c4e84b87d690033f7505b8570427ab8468 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: marxin Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2016 12:05:48 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] vimrc: fix TAB settings ---

Re: [PATCH] DWARF: make signedness explicit for enumerator const values

Mark, Thank you for your answer! On 11/10/2016 01:38 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: IMHO having an explicit DW_AT_type pointing at the base type with size and encoding for the DW_TAG_enumerator_type is better for consumers than having to try and interpret the DW_FORM used to encode the values. I’m

RE: [PATCH 2/3] MIPS/GCC/test: Implement `-mcode-readable=yes' option test

Maciej Rozycki writes: > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.target/mips/mips.exp (mips_option_tests): Add > `-mcode-readable=yes' array element. > --- > OK to apply? OK, thanks. Matthew

RE: [PATCH 1/3] MIPS/GCC/test: Implement `-mmicromips' option test

Maciej Rozycki writes: > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.target/mips/mips.exp (mips_option_tests): Add > `-mmicromips' array element. OK, thanks. Matthew

RE: [PATCH] [ARC] New option handling, refurbish multilib support.

> HEAD binutils supports '.cpu NPS400' and HEAD GCC also correctly emits > '.cpu NPS400' (when -mcpu=nps400 is passed). After your change we no > longer correctly emit '.cpu NPS400'. > Sorry for this miss-understanding. Updating the patch to emit .cpu NSPS400. Thanks, Claudiu

RE: [PATCH 0/3] MIPS/GCC: Changes for `.insn' assembly annotation

Maciej Rozycki writes: > This small patch series addresses an issue uncovered by a recent > binutils master branch update, scheduled for the upcoming 2.28 release, > where we fail to annotate stray code labels -- generally produced for > code marked as unreachable --

Re: [PATCH] [ARC] New option handling, refurbish multilib support.

* Claudiu Zissulescu [2016-11-10 12:02:34 +0100]: > Hi, > > Please find the revised patch which includes the refurbishing of > mmpy-option option, and a new comment on DEFAULT_arc_fpu_build > define. As for the last suggestion, my proposal is to have a latter >

[PATCH] Fix PR78312

backprop changes values of SSA names - while it properly handles debug info it fails to reset range/align info. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2016-11-14 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/78312 *

RE: [MIPS] Enable descriptors for nested functions in Ada

Eric Botcazou writes: > Similarly to x86, PowerPC and SPARC, this enables the use of custom run- > time descriptors in Ada, thus eliminating the need for trampolines and > executable stack in presence of pointers to nested functions. > > Unfortunately I don't have access

Re: [patch] Disable LTO note about strict aliasing

On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > It's the note issued by the -Wlto-type-mismatch warning: > > q.ads:7:13: warning: type of 'q__proc' does not match original declaration [- > Wlto-type-mismatch] >procedure Proc (A : Arr); > ^ >

Re: [PATCH] df: Change defs in entry and uses in exit block during separate shrink-wrapping

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > So far all target implementations of the separate shrink-wrapping hooks > use the DF LIVE info to figure out around which basic blocks the non- > volatile registers need to be saved. This is done by looking

Re: [PATCH] loop distribution bug fix

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> The biggest "lack" of loop distribution is the ability to undo CSE so for > > I hadn't noticed this problem yet. I will have to

[RFC PATCH] Support -fsanitize=integer-arith-overflow even for vectors

Hi! Working virtually out of Samoa. The following patch is an attempt to handle -fsanitize=undefined for vectors. We already diagnose out of bounds accesses for vector subscripts, this patch adds expansion for vector UBSAN_CHECK_* and generates those in ubsan. Haven't finished up the many vect

Re: [Patch 5/17] Add -fpermitted-flt-eval-methods=[c11|ts-18661-3]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 09:42:32PM -0700, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 11/11/2016 08:37 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > >diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi > >index f133b3a..75ff8ec 100644 > >--- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi > >+++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi > >@@ -378,7 +378,8 @@

Some backward threader refactoring

I was looking at the possibility of dropping threading from VRP1/VRP2 or DOM1/DOM2 in favor of the backwards threader -- the obvious idea being to recover some compile-time for gcc-7. Of the old-style threader passes (VRP1, VRP2, DOM1, DOM2), VRP2 is by far the least useful. But I can't

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Improve ivopts group costs

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Evgeny Kudryashov wrote: > On 2016-11-10 13:30, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> >> Hi, >> I see the cost problem with your test now. When computing an address >> type iv_use with a candidate, the computation consists of two parts, >> for computation can

  1   2   >