[patch] libiberty/78584

While the root solution for the bug is "don't do that", we should at least try to detect the obviously wrong case more gracefully. Committed. * argv.c (expandargv): Check for directories passed as @-files. Index: argv.c ===

[PING][PATCH] [AArch64] Fix PR71112

Hi, Please consider this as a personal reminder to review the patch at following link and let me know your comments on the same. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02305.html Thanks, Naveen

[PING][PATCH] [AArch64] Fix PR78382

Hi, Please consider this as a personal reminder to review the patch at following link and let me know your comments on the same. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02078.html Thanks, Naveen

[PING] [PATCH] [AArch64] Fix PR71727

Hi, Please consider this as a personal reminder to review the patch at following link and let me know your comments on the same. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00697.html Thanks, Naveen

Re: [PATCH v2,rs6000] Add built-in function support for Power9 byte instructions.

Kelvin, This version shows a lot of improvement. (cmprb): New expansion. (*cmprb): New insn. (*setb): New insn. (cmprb2): New expansion. (*cmprb2): New insn. (cmpeqb): New expansion. (*cmpeqb): New insn. The named and un-named patterns should have different names. Technically, the names don't

Re: [PR middle-end/78566] Fix uninit regressions caused by previous -Wmaybe-uninit change

On 11/29/2016 09:33 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: This fixes the gcc.dg/uninit-pred-6* failures I seem to have caused on some non x86 platforms. Sorry for the delay. The problem is that my fix for PR61409 had the logic backwards. I was proving that all the uses of a PHI are invalidated by any one

Re: Ping 4 [PATCH] enhance buffer overflow warnings (and c/53562)

I lost track of this patch among all the others but I don't see a reply to it in the archives. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02173.html The only controversial part about this one that I recall was whether object size type 0 or 1 should be used for raw memory functions like

[PATCH v2,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. This second version of the patch differs from the first in the following ways: 1. Removed the UNSPEC_SETB new unspec value. Rewrote these patterns to describe semantics in terms of primitive

Re: [PATCH] detect null sprintf pointers (PR 78519)

On 12/05/2016 11:21 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/04/2016 04:55 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug 78519 points out that while the -Wformat warning flags a small subset of sprintf calls with a null pointer argument to a %s directive (those where the pointer is a constant) it misses the much bigger set

Re: [PATCH] handle integer overflow/wrapping in printf directives (PR 78622)

On 12/05/2016 01:26 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:31:18PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: +static bool +adjust_range_for_overflow (tree dirtype, tree *argmin, tree *argmax) +{ + if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (dirtype)) +{ + *argmin = dirmin; + *argmax = dirmax; +} +

Re: [RFC] Assert DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN is different from the decl itself

On 12/01/2016 09:10 AM, Martin Jambor wrote: Hello, On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:09:19PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 10:17:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: ... So it seems that rather than an assert that we should just not walk down a self-referencing DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN.

[patch, fortran] [F03] Spurious "requires DTIO" reported against namelist statement

The attached patch removes one error message and updates several test cases. I split alloc_comp_constraint_1.f90 into two cases with the addition of alloc_comp_constraint_7.f90. One gets different error messages depending on which standard is invoked, f95 or f2003. I will do an appropriate

[PATCH], Committed, PR target/78688, fix PowerPC bootstrap issue

A recent change to enable signed vs. unsigned comparisons to be flagged as an error broke the PowerPC bootstrap. The issue was with the FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P macro. I changed it and the FUNCTION_ARG_REGNO_P to both use IN_RANGE instead of doing a subtraction of the first value and comparing it

[Aarch64][PATCH] Fix gcc.dg/zero_bits_compound-2.c for aarch64

This patches fixes a regression in gcc.dg/zero_bits_compound-2.c. A recent patch (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02392.html) to the aarch64 backend improved generation for 'and' instructions with constants. The patch changed the number of 'and' instruction generated at the

[PATCH] add missing attribute nonnull to stdio functions (PR 78673 and 17308)

The new -Wformat-length warning pass detects and diagnoses non- constant null format strings. This is in addition to (but not in conflict with) -Wformat which is limited to detecting only null constants. A recently posted patch of mine also adds the detection of null pointer arguments to the %s

Re: [patch] Fix PR middle-end/78642

On 12/05/2016 03:46 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Hi, this fixes the regressions introduced on SPARC by the newly reenabled RTL sharing verification. They come from the special treatment for CLOBBERs: case CLOBBER: /* Share clobbers of hard registers (like cc0), but do not share pseudo reg

Re: [tree-tailcall] Check if function returns it's argument

On 12/02/2016 01:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote: The LHS on the assignment makes it easier to identify when a tail call is possible. It's not needed for correctness. Not having the LHS on the assignment just means we won't get an optimized tail call. Under what circumstances would the LHS

[patch] Fix PR middle-end/78642

Hi, this fixes the regressions introduced on SPARC by the newly reenabled RTL sharing verification. They come from the special treatment for CLOBBERs: case CLOBBER: /* Share clobbers of hard registers (like cc0), but do not share pseudo reg clobbers or clobbers of hard

Re: [patch v2] Get rid of stack trampolines for nested functions (1/4)

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Lynn A. Boger wrote: > I think you mean https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18200. Yes, thanks, I meant to write https://golang.org/issue/18200. Ian > On 12/05/2016 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10

Re: [patch v2] Get rid of stack trampolines for nested functions (1/4)

> According to https://golang.org/cl/18200, this change broke Go on PPC64le. Any other platform where this also happened? > I haven't investigated myself and I don't know why. Go does not use > stack trampolines for function closures. It does use function > closures, but they are built on the

[PATCH] Fix PR78646

Hi, PR78646 identifies a case where the base expression for a strength-reduced memory reference gets a type of insufficient alignment. This pointed out the fact that we should use the type of the candidate expression for the new base expression in all cases. Patch by Stefan M. Freudenberger.

Re: [Patch][i386] PR 70118: Fix ubsan warning on SSE2 loadl_epi64 and storel_epi64

Trying again, this time with changelog. gcc/ 2016-11-30 Allan Sandfeld Jensen PR target/70118 * gcc/config/i386/mmintrin.h (__m64_u): New type * gcc/config/i386/emmintrin.h (_mm_loadl_epi64, _mm_storel_epi64): Make the allowed unaligned

[PATCH] Added noexcept on constructors

Thanks for the feedback. Updated patch is below. The noexcept on definition and the declaration of constructors _Sp_locker do not match. ChangeLog 2016-12-05 Aditya Kumar * src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc (_Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p)): Added noexcept on

Re: [patch v2] Get rid of stack trampolines for nested functions (1/4)

I think you mean https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18200. - Lynn On 12/05/2016 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: 2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou PR ada/37139 PR ada/67205

[PATCH] Fix ICE due to IPA-VRP (PR tree-optimization/78681)

Hi! As shown on the testcase, with K definitions and fn prototypes with promoted types, we can end up computing caller's value ranges in wider type than the parameter actually has in the function. The problem with that is that wide_int_storage::from can actually wrap around, so either as in the

Re: [patch v2] Get rid of stack trampolines for nested functions (1/4)

On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > 2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou > > PR ada/37139 > PR ada/67205 > * common.opt (-ftrampolines): New option. > * doc/invoke.texi (Code Gen Options): Document it. >

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Fold vector addition built-ins in GIMPLE

What's your target triple? > On Dec 4, 2016, at 6:36 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > On Nov 01 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote: > >> * gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-add-7.c: New. > > spawn -ignore SIGHUP /daten/gcc/gcc-20161203/Build/gcc/xgcc >

C++ PATCH for c++/78647 (ICE-on-invalid with attribute_fallthrough_p)

We were crashing on this invalid test because cp_parser_std_attribute_spec_seq in cp_parser_statement returned error_mark_node, but the subsequent attribute_fallthrough_p wasn't prepared for that. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk? 2016-12-05 Marek Polacek

Re: [PATCH] handle integer overflow/wrapping in printf directives (PR 78622)

Hi! On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:31:18PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > +static bool > +adjust_range_for_overflow (tree dirtype, tree *argmin, tree *argmax) > +{ > + if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (dirtype)) > +{ > + *argmin = dirmin; > + *argmax = dirmax; > +} > + else > +{ > +

[Patch, fortran] PR77903 - [F08] gfortran 6.1.0/7.0.0 accept invalid code with conflicting module/submodule interfaces

Dear All, It took me an excessively long time to realise that processing the typespec for an explicitly typed module procedure was wiping out the interface symbol and so preventing the comparison of characteristics between the interface and the separate module procedure. Transferring the module

Re: [C++] trailing array hack

On 12/05/2016 11:09 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: Jason, Martin. looking at pr78635, I find it related to Martin's patch of 15-12-2015 dealing with flexible array members. Martin's patch makes the following ill-formed: struct Base {int m; char ary[];}; // ends in flexible array - OK struct

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On 12/05/2016 11:25 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/05/2016 08:50 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/02/2016 08:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/02/2016 01:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Martin, PR 78521 notes that the gimple-ssa-sprintf pass doesn't do the right thing (i.e., the -Wformat-length and

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:37:23AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 12/05/2016 11:30 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > >On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > >>We're already using std::min std::max, std::swap and others. > > > >Note we're not using std::min nor std::max. I gave this a

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On 12/05/2016 11:30 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: We're already using std::min std::max, std::swap and others. Note we're not using std::min nor std::max. I gave this a shot a while ago, but it didn't pan out:

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > >> > >>Thanks for the heads up! I just looked at that code yesterday while > >>analyzing bug 78608, wondering if it was safe. Now I know it isn't. > >>I think it might be best to simply hand code the expression instead > >>of taking a

Re: [ARM][PATCH] Fix failing poly64 tests on ARM

Hi Tamar, On 5 December 2016 at 16:32, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 05/12/16 10:39, Tamar Christina wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> This patch fixes test failures on arm-none-eabi. >> Poly64 was being used by files that were not supposed >> to be testing poly64 types. >>

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > We're already using std::min std::max, std::swap and others. Note we're not using std::min nor std::max. I gave this a shot a while ago, but it didn't pan out: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg00886.html Marek

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On 12/05/2016 08:50 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/02/2016 08:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/02/2016 01:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Martin, PR 78521 notes that the gimple-ssa-sprintf pass doesn't do the right thing (i.e., the -Wformat-length and -fprintf-return-value options behave

Re: [PATCH] detect null sprintf pointers (PR 78519)

On 12/04/2016 04:55 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug 78519 points out that while the -Wformat warning flags a small subset of sprintf calls with a null pointer argument to a %s directive (those where the pointer is a constant) it misses the much bigger set where the pointer is not a constant but

Re: Fold strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:32:15PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > So I had to check if SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (rhs2) was call to strstr > rather than rhs1. Then you need to test both whether it is strstr (s, t) == s or s == strstr (s, t). > + gassign *ga =

Re: Fold strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known

On 5 December 2016 at 23:40, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 5 December 2016 at 23:38, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> On 12/05/2016 07:02 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >>> >>> This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if >>>

Re: Fold strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known

On 5 December 2016 at 23:38, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 12/05/2016 07:02 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> >> This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if >> strlen (t) is known. > > > That's not the same thing, is it? > > s = "hello world", t = "hello":

[C++] trailing array hack

Jason, Martin. looking at pr78635, I find it related to Martin's patch of 15-12-2015 dealing with flexible array members. Martin's patch makes the following ill-formed: struct Base {int m; char ary[];}; // ends in flexible array - OK struct Derived : Base {}; // base ends in flexible array

Re: [PATCH] Fix BIT_FIELD_REF type on vectorizable_live_operation created BFR (PR tree-optimization/78675)

On 12/05/2016 09:52 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! For VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P vectype the element type can have different precision from TYPE_SIZE, which is what we use for the bitsize. The following patch uses then some other integral type of that precision before it is actually converted to

Re: Fold strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known

On 12/05/2016 07:02 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known. That's not the same thing, is it? s = "hello world", t = "hello": strstr (s, t) == s, but not strcmp (s, t) == 0. I think you'd want memcmp (s, t,

Re: [PATCH] Improve fold_compare (PR c++/71537)

On 12/05/2016 10:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! As the testcase shows, we also want to fold "abcd" + 3 != NULL at constant time. The following patch fixes that. Additionally, I think if !indirect_base0 then we basically want to compare whether the base0's value rather than address is

Re: [PATCH] Readd strchr constant folding (PR c++/71537)

On 12/05/2016 10:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:55:05AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/05/2016 09:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the

Fold strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known

Hi, This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if strlen (t) is known. One issue I came across was forwprop1 reverses the order of operands in eq_expr below: eg test-case: _Bool f(char *s, int cond) { char *t1 = __builtin_strstr (s, "hello"); _Bool t2 = (t1 == s);

Re: [PATCH] Readd strchr constant folding (PR c++/71537)

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:55:05AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 12/05/2016 09:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c > >broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++ > >folks want to use). > > > >Fixed by

Re: [PATCH] Readd memchr constant folding (PR c++/71537)

On 12/05/2016 09:57 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! The slightly less recent but also post-6 changes to move memchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c and fold-const-call.c also broke the constexpr handling, it now only constant folds calls that return NULL, while previously it also handled

Re: [PATCH] Readd strchr constant folding (PR c++/71537)

On 12/05/2016 09:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++ folks want to use). Fixed by handling it also in fold-const-call.c. Bootstrapped/regtested on

Re: [PATCH] fix PR71721

On 12/01/2016 10:14 PM, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote: Hi, it would be nice if uclinux targets are allowed to enable posix threads. Together with uClibc-ng/uClibc you can build m68k-nommu toolchain and enable old Linuxthreads instead of NPTL/TLS. With following change it is possible to build boost,

[arm-embedded][committed] PR71607: New approach to arm_disable_literal_pool

On 29/11/16 09:45, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 17/11/16 10:00, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Andre Vieira (lists) >> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> This patch tackles the issue reported in PR71607. This patch takes a >>> different

Re: [PATCH] Add AVX512 k-mask intrinsics

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Andrew Senkevich wrote: > 2016-12-02 21:31 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak : >> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Andrew Senkevich >> wrote: >>> 2016-11-11 22:14 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 6/6] ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCRR and MRRC intrinsics

On 05/12/16 11:52, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC >> intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective >> instructions: >> >>

[PATCH] Improve fold_compare (PR c++/71537)

Hi! As the testcase shows, we also want to fold "abcd" + 3 != NULL at constant time. The following patch fixes that. Additionally, I think if !indirect_base0 then we basically want to compare whether the base0's value rather than address is non-NULL, which we can't optimize. All we can optimize

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 5/6] ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC intrinsics

On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi, > > This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC > intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective > instructions: > >

[PATCH] Readd memchr constant folding (PR c++/71537)

Hi! The slightly less recent but also post-6 changes to move memchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c and fold-const-call.c also broke the constexpr handling, it now only constant folds calls that return NULL, while previously it also handled returning first argument + constant offset.

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 4/6] ARM ACLE Coprocessor LDC and STC intrinsics

On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi, > > This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor LDC and STC > intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective > instructions: > >

[PATCH] Readd strchr constant folding (PR c++/71537)

Hi! The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++ folks want to use). Fixed by handling it also in fold-const-call.c. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 3/6] ARM ACLE Coprocessor CDP intrinsics

On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi, > > This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor CDP > intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective > instructions: > >

Re: [SPARC] Disable U constraint with LRA

> Fixed by disabling the relevant alternatives in the few patterns using the > constraint and replacing it with a simple r constraint. This yields a clean > C testsuite in 32-bit mode. There was a thinko in the patch: the U constraint cannot be just replaced with r as-is, because it is matched

[PATCH] Fix BIT_FIELD_REF type on vectorizable_live_operation created BFR (PR tree-optimization/78675)

Hi! For VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P vectype the element type can have different precision from TYPE_SIZE, which is what we use for the bitsize. The following patch uses then some other integral type of that precision before it is actually converted to lhs_type (boolean_type_node).

Re: [PATCH 2/6][ARM] Move CRC builtins to refactored framework

On 05/12/16 15:05, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 01/12/16 17:25, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> This patch refactors the implementation of the ARM ACLE CRC builtins to >>> use the builtin framework. >>> >>> Is this OK for trunk? >>>

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 1/6] Refactor NEON builtin framework to work for other builtins

On 01/12/16 17:25, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 17/11/16 10:42, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> Hi Andre, >> >> On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Refactor NEON builtin framework such that it can be used to implement >>> other builtins. >>> >>> Is this OK for trunk? >>>

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 10/17] Refactor support code for NEON builtins.

On 28/07/16 12:54, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Matthew Wahab > wrote: >> The ACLE intrinsics introduced to support the ARMv8.2 FP16 extensions >> require that intrinsics for scalar (VFP) instructions are available >> under different

Re: [patch part, libgcc] Add AVX-specific matmul

On 2016.11.30 at 08:17 +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote: > Hello world, > > the patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-11/msg00246.html > (the one going to gcc-patches was rejected due to size of > regernerated files) contains one libgcc change, which exposes > the __cpu_model interface fox i386

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 08:50:08AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > I posted a bigger patch to fix this and other related problems on > Friday (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg00262.html). > In hindsight, I should have probably committed the fix for this > on its own. Please let me know

Re: [PATCH] correct handling of non-constant width and precision (pr 78521)

On 12/02/2016 08:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/02/2016 01:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Martin, PR 78521 notes that the gimple-ssa-sprintf pass doesn't do the right thing (i.e., the -Wformat-length and -fprintf-return-value options behave incorrectly) when a conversion specification

Re: [ARM][PATCH] Fix failing poly64 tests on ARM

On 05/12/16 10:39, Tamar Christina wrote: Hi All, This patch fixes test failures on arm-none-eabi. Poly64 was being used by files that were not supposed to be testing poly64 types. I have added a new MACRO that must be defined in addition to having CRYPTO available before use of Poly64 types

Re: [PATCH 2/6][ARM] Move CRC builtins to refactored framework

On 01/12/16 17:25, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This patch refactors the implementation of the ARM ACLE CRC builtins to >> use the builtin framework. >> >> Is this OK for trunk? >> >> Regards, >> Andre >> >> gcc/ChangeLog >> 2016-11-09

Re: [PATCH] Add AVX512 k-mask intrinsics

2016-12-02 21:31 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak : > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Andrew Senkevich > wrote: >> 2016-11-11 22:14 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak : >>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Andrew Senkevich >>>

[PATCH][ARM] Remove uses of leaf_function_p

Using leaf_function_p in a backend is dangerous as it incorrectly returns false if it is called while in a sequence (for example during prolog/epilog generation). Replace all uses with crtl->is_leaf as this is now initialized early enough in ira.c. This typically causes no code generation

Re: [PATCH v3] Do not simplify "(and (reg) (const bit))" to if_then_else.

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 07:56:46AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > Sorry for breaking this. With the constant changes in the > > patterns this is supposed to fix it seems I've lost track of the > > status quo. I'll check what

Re: [PATCH v3] Do not simplify "(and (reg) (const bit))" to if_then_else.

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > Sorry for breaking this. With the constant changes in the > patterns this is supposed to fix it seems I've lost track of the > status quo. I'll check what went wrong with the patch; in the > mean time Andreas will revert this, or if

[PING] [PATCH, ARM] Further improve stack usage on sha512 (PR 77308)

Hi, this was the latest version of my patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02796.html Thanks Bernd.

[Patch, Fortran, cleanup] PR 78674: merge gfc_convert_type_warn and gfc_convert_chartype

Hi all, the attached patch does not fix an actual bug, but merely does some cleanup, geting rid of some code duplication. It removes the function gfc_convert_chartype and merges its functionality into the more general gfc_convert_type_warn. Regtests cleanly on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?

[build] Disable hwcaps on libgfortran

The AVX-specific matmul patch for libgfortran broke Solaris/x86 testing with /bin/as pretty badly: every single execution test involving libgfortran.so now FAILs like ld.so.1: alloc_comp_1.exe: fatal:

Re: [PATCH, Fortran, v3] Fix deallocation of nested derived typed components

Hi Dominique, hi all, @Dominique: Thanks for testing. I have extended my usual testcycle to add the libgomp.fortran tests. I could fix the errors below by calling deallocate_with_status directly from the trans_omp_*-routines instead of using the gfc_array_deallocate wrapper. While being at it, I

Re: [PATCH v3] Do not simplify "(and (reg) (const bit))" to if_then_else.

On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 04:00 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > > > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 07:19:13PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > > > [ I did not see this patch before, sorry. ] > > > > > > This causes the second

Re: [PATCH] fix -fmax-errors & notes, take 2

On 12/02/2016 09:07 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: Arguments should be documented. I really must get into the habit of adding FIXME when writing dev comments. + if (count >= (int) context->max_errors) Looks like there are some unnecessary type mismatches leading to this cast. Maybe declare

[PATCH 1/2] [ARC] Generating code for profiling.

Remove old gmonlib from libgcc and reimplemnt profiling using UCB counters. gcc/ 2016-07-28 Claudiu Zissulescu * config/arc/arc.h (LINK_SPEC): Tidy up. (ENDFILE_SPEC): Likewise. (LIB_SPEC): Likewise. (STARTFILE_SPEC): Include gcrt0 when

[PATCH 2/2] [ARC] Remove old prof patterns.

Cleanup old patterns. gcc/ 2016-10-10 Claudiu Zissulescu * config/arc/arc.md (call_prof): Remove. (call_value_prof): Likewise. (sibcall_prof): Likewise. (sibcall_value_prof): Likewise. --- gcc/config/arc/arc.md | 63

[PATCH 0/2] [ARC] Reimplement profiling support.

This series of two patches reimplements ARC's profiling support in a sustainable way. First, we remove the old gmon lib implementation and its dependencies from gcc and libgcc. This old implementation was partially working only for A7xx type of processors, and only for bare-metal type of

Re: [PATCH 6/6][ARM] Implement support for ACLE Coprocessor MCRR and MRRC intrinsics

On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi, > > This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC > intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective > instructions: > >

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 7/7] Added support for ARMV8-M Security Extension cmse_nonsecure_caller intrinsic

On 30/11/16 12:06, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi, > > I changed the testcase with this patch since the old testcase was > casting a function pointer to another function pointer and using that > pointer to call the function. This is undefined behavior. The new test > reflects a more sane use of

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 6/7] ARMv8-M Security Extension's cmse_nonsecure_call: use __gnu_cmse_nonsecure_call

On 02/12/16 13:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 02/12/16 13:36, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> On 23/11/16 11:53, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>> On 11/11/16 16:19, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: And CC'ing Ramana and Richard this time... >>> Hi, >>> >>> After some extra testing I

Re: [PATCHv3 5/7, GCC[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 5/7] Handling ARMv8-M Security Extension's cmse_nonsecure_call attribute, ARM, V8M] Handling ARMv8-M Security Extension's cmse_nonsecure_call attri

On 30/11/16 17:22, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 30/11/16 12:05, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I got a bug report against the old version of this patch and fixed it >> here. This had to do with GCC optimizations sharing types with and >> without the 'cmse_nonsecure_call' attribute. The

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 4/7] ARMv8-M Security Extension's cmse_nonsecure_entry: clear registers

On 30/11/16 17:22, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 30/11/16 15:32, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> On 23/11/16 11:52, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> After some extra testing I realized there was an issue with the way we >>> were clearing registers when returning from a

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 3/7] ARMv8-M Security Extension's cmse_nonsecure_entry: __acle_se label and bxns return

On 27/10/16 10:55, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 26/10/16 11:03, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> Hi Andre, >> >> On 25/10/16 17:28, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >>> On 25/07/16 14:23, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: This patch extends support for the ARMv8-M Security Extensions

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 2/7] Handling ARMv8-M Security Extension's cmse_nonsecure_entry attribute

On 27/10/16 11:19, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 27/10/16 10:54, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> On 26/10/16 17:28, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >>> On 26/10/16 17:28, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: On 26/10/16 10:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > +static tree > +arm_handle_cmse_nonsecure_entry (tree

[arm-embedded][committed][PATCH 1/7] Add support for ARMv8-M's Secure Extensions flag and intrinsics

On 27/10/16 11:01, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 27/10/16 10:53, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: >> On 26/10/16 14:00, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >>> On 26/10/16 10:12, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Andre, thanks for resending them. On 25/10/16 17:26, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > On 24/08/16

Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Fix PR71112

[CC'ing James] On 23/11/16 05:25, Hurugalawadi, Naveen wrote: Hi, Please find attached the patch that fixes PR71112. The current implementation that handles SYMBOL_SMALL_GOT_28K in aarch64_load_symref_appropriately access the high part of RTX for Big-Endian mode which results in ICE for

RE: [PATCH 2/4] [ARC] Cleanup implementation.

Hi, > > * config/arc/arc.md (ls_gd_load): Remove. > > (tls_gd_dispatch): Likewise. > > I don't see the connection between these two parts? Plus it would be > nice to have some more words _somewhere_ for why these are being > removed. The commit message is probably the right place I'd

RE: [PATCH][ARC] Fix PIE.

> gcc/config.gcc | 2 +- > gcc/config/arc/arc.h | 10 -- > libgcc/config.host | 4 ++-- > libgcc/config/arc/crti.S | 2 ++ Approved and committed, thank you for your contribution, Claudiu

[Ada] Do not enable atomic primitives on Power/Darwin 32-bit

Iain Sandoe privately reported that the overhaul of the system files had broken the Ada compiler on Power/Darwin 32-bit. Applied on the mainline. 2016-12-05 Eric Botcazou * system-darwin-ppc.ads (Support_Atomic_Primitives): Set to True only if the

[ARM][PATCH] Fix failing poly64 tests on ARM

Hi All, This patch fixes test failures on arm-none-eabi. Poly64 was being used by files that were not supposed to be testing poly64 types. I have added a new MACRO that must be defined in addition to having CRYPTO available before use of Poly64 types are allowed in the header arm-neon-ref.h. Ok

Re: [PATCH v3] Do not simplify "(and (reg) (const bit))" to if_then_else.

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 04:00:25AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 07:19:13PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > [ I did not see this patch before, sorry. ] > > > > > > This causes the second half of

Re: [AArch64] [PATCH] Fix failing poly tests AArch64

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:37:41AM +, Tamar Christina wrote: > > Hi All, > > This patch fixes test failures on aarch64-none-linux-gnu. > Some vreinterpret intrinsics which are required for some of > the tests to run were missing. > > Bootstrapped and reg tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu. >

[AArch64] [PATCH] Fix failing poly tests AArch64

Hi All, This patch fixes test failures on aarch64-none-linux-gnu. Some vreinterpret intrinsics which are required for some of the tests to run were missing. Bootstrapped and reg tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk? gcc/ 2016-12-01 Tamar Christina

  1   2   >