Re: [PATCH 2/2] IPA ICF: make algorithm stable to survive -fcompare-debug

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:21:08AM +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote: > Since then, I've noticed that > gcc.dg/tree-ssa/flatten-3.c scan-assembler cycle[123][: \t\n] > now fails on aarch64 and arm targets. It fails on x86_64-linux and i686-linux too. Jakub

Re: [hsa] Exclude parallel outlines from hsa_callable_functions_p

Hi, On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 02:55:46PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > after the merge of nvidia OpenMP implementation, the normal parallel > outline functions were also marked as "omp declare target" which lead > to them being cloned and compiled to HSA which is not only unnecessary > but

Re: [PATCH 2/2] IPA ICF: make algorithm stable to survive -fcompare-debug

Hi Martin, On 10 January 2017 at 15:40, Martin Liška wrote: > On 01/10/2017 02:56 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> >>> Second part of the patch does sorting of final congruence classes, it's >>> groups >>>

Re: [Patch][ARM,AArch64] more poly64 intrinsics and tests

Ping? James, I'm not sure whether your comment was a request for a new version of my patch or just FYI? On 3 January 2017 at 16:47, Christophe Lyon wrote: > Ping? > > > On 14 December 2016 at 23:09, Christophe Lyon > wrote: >> On 14

Re: [ARM] PR 78253 do not resolve weak ref locally

Ping? On 3 January 2017 at 16:45, Christophe Lyon wrote: > Ping? > > The patch is at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg00078.html > > > On 14 December 2016 at 16:29, Christophe Lyon > wrote: >> Ping^2 ? >> >> As a reminder,

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

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:41:42AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 06/12/16 00:46, Michael Collison wrote: > >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

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

On 06/12/16 00:46, Michael Collison wrote: 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

Re: [PATCH] avoid infinite recursion in maybe_warn_alloc_args_overflow (pr 78775)

Hi Martin, On 9 January 2017 at 04:14, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/08/2017 02:04 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >> >> On 01/06/2017 09:45 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >>> >>> On 01/05/2017 08:52 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >>> >>> So Richi asked for removal of the VR_ANTI_RANGE handling, which

[PATCH] Fix EVRP not setting ranges on PHI reults

This fixes EVRP to also set range-info/nonnull for PHI results as well as not doing useless work in setting such info for SSA defs we'll propagate out later. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, installed. Richard. 2017-01-11 Richard Biener *

Re: [PATCH] Optimize n + 1 for automatic n array (PR c++/71537)

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:31:38AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > > Or shall I add the function local address check into maybe_nonzero_address > > > instead (return 1 for those)? > > > > Yes please, and cleanup the other user of maybe_nonzero_address

[PATCH][PR lto/79042] Propagate node->dynamically_initialized bit for varpool node to LTRANS stage.

Hi, as mentioned in PR, LTO doesn't propagate node->dynamically_initialized bit for varpool nodes that leads to ASan fails to detect initialization order fiasco even for trivial example (e.g. from here: https://github.com/google/sanitizers/wiki/AddressSanitizerExampleInitOrderFiasco). This

Re: [PATCH] Optimize n + 1 for automatic n array (PR c++/71537)

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:31:38AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > > Or shall I add the function local address check into maybe_nonzero_address > > instead (return 1 for those)? > > Yes please, and cleanup the other user of maybe_nonzero_address then > (which contains the code you added). Ok,

Re: [PATCH] DOn't miscompile programs with -flto -fno-merge-constants (PR middle-end/50199)

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > LTO partitioning can actually take appart uses of STRING_CSTs or other > constants and put those into multiple partitions. When -fno-merge-constants > is in effect, it means those constants aren't merged by the linker and > e.g. following

Re: [PATCH] Optimize n + 1 for automatic n array (PR c++/71537)

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > This patch allows to fold n + 1 != 0 into true for automatic array n. > We already handle it for variables in the symbol table (if not weak), > but automatic vars are never in the symbol table. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and

Re: [PATCH v2] Offer suggestions for unrecognized sanitizer options (PR driver/78877)

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 08:47:26PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > + /* For -fsanitize-recover= (and not -fno-sanitize-recover=), > + don't offer the non-recoverable options. */ > + if (!sanitizer_opts[i].can_recover && code == OPT_fsanitize_recover_ > + && value) If a

Re: [PATCH] adding missing LTO to some warning options (PR 78606)

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: > The -Walloca-larger-than, -Wformat-length, and -Wformat-truncation > options do not mention LTO among the supported languages and so are > disabled when -flto is used, causing false negatives. > > The attached patch adds the missing LTO to the three

RE: [patch mips/gcc] add build-time and runtime options to disable or set madd.fmt type

Sandra Loosemore writes: > On 01/10/2017 07:24 AM, Yunqiang Su wrote: > > Hi, folks, any idea about this patch? > > I can only comment on the documentation parts. I am reviewing the patch but need to determine if the changes are sufficient and safe to meet the goal.

<    1   2