[PING 3] Ability to remap file names in __FILE__, etc (PR other/70268)

Hi, I would like to again ping this patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg01451.html It has been reviewed (with thanks) by David Malcolm[1] and Martin Sebor[2]. Their concerns are addressed in the latest revision of the patch:

Re: [PATCH][Middle-end]79538 missing -Wformat-overflow with %s and non-member array arguments

Hi, I updated gimple-fold.c as you suggested, bootstrapped and re-tested on both x86 and aarch64. no any issue. diff --git a/gcc/gimple-fold.c b/gcc/gimple-fold.c index 353a46e..eb6a87a 100644 --- a/gcc/gimple-fold.c +++ b/gcc/gimple-fold.c @@ -1323,6 +1323,19 @@ get_range_strlen (tree

Re: Add support for SVE gather loads

On 11/17/2017 02:58 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch adds support for SVE gather loads. It uses the basically > the same analysis code as the AVX gather support, but after that > there are two major differences: > > - It uses new internal functions rather than target built-ins. > The

[wwwdocs] readings.html - adjust another Donald Knuth link

Somehow we must have missed this one while updating the other related links on this page. Committed. Gerald Index: readings.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/readings.html,v retrieving revision 1.286 diff -u -r1.286

Re: SLP reductions with variable-length vectors

On 11/22/2017 11:10 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Richard Sandiford writes: >> Two things stopped us using SLP reductions with variable-length vectors: >> >> (1) We didn't have a way of constructing the initial vector. >> This patch does it by creating a vector

Re: Add support for bitwise reductions

On 11/22/2017 11:12 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Richard Sandiford writes: >> This patch adds support for the SVE bitwise reduction instructions >> (ANDV, ORV and EORV). It's a fairly mechanical extension of existing >> REDUC_* operators. >> >> Tested on

Re: Add support for SVE scatter stores

On 11/17/2017 03:10 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This is mostly a mechanical extension of the previous gather load > support to scatter stores. The internal functions in this case are: > > IFN_SCATTER_STORE (base, offsets, scale, values) > IFN_MASK_SCATTER_STORE (base, offsets, scale,

Re: Handle peeling for alignment with masking

On 11/17/2017 08:13 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch adds support for aligning vectors by using a partial > first iteration. E.g. if the start pointer is 3 elements beyond > an aligned address, the first iteration will have a mask in which > the first three elements are false. > > On

Re: [PATCH] Improve alloca alignment

> No clue, but ISTM that it should. Eric, can you try that and see if it > addresses these problems? I'd really like to get this wrapped up, but I > don't have access to any sparc systems to test it myself. Yes, the INIT_EXPANDERS trick works for SPARC (but this has nothing to do with

Re: [PATCH] Fix gimple-ssa-sprintf.c ICE (PR tree-optimization/83198)

On 12/13/2017 03:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! This patch fixes 2 issues in format_floating. One is that when determining precision, we should consider solely the type *printf* will read the argument as (i.e. double unless L or ll modifier is used, in which case long double), not the type of

Re: [PATCH v2] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On 13 December 2017 22:30:12 CET, David Malcolm wrote: >-/* Walk over all statements of all reachable BBs and call >check_array_bounds >- on them. */ >+/* A dom_walker subclass for use by vrp_prop::check_all_array_refs, >+ to walk over all statements of all reachable

Re: [C++ PATCH] Fix ICE with label difference as template non-type argument (PR c++/79650)

OK. On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > reduced_constant_expression_p uses initializer_constant_valid_p > to determine what is a valid constant expression. That accepts several > cases which aren't compile time INTEGER_CST, just something that the

Re: [C++ Patch PING] [C++ Patch] PR 82235 (Copy ctor is not found for copying array of an object when it's marked explicit)

On 12/12/2017 03:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi, On 15/11/2017 00:54, Mukesh Kapoor wrote: Hi, This patch fixes https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82235 For the following test case struct Foo {     Foo() {}     explicit Foo(const Foo& aOther) {} }; struct Bar {     Foo m[1]; };

[PATCH] Fix https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83396#c28 on ia64 (PR bootstrap/83396, take 2)

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 03:25:07PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I think there are 2 issues. One is that the ia64 backend emits > the group barrier insns before BB_HEAD label, so it isn't part of a bb, > but has BLOCK_FOR_INSN of the following block, that looks invalid to me > and the ia64.c hunk

[C++ PATCH] Fix ICE with label difference as template non-type argument (PR c++/79650)

Hi! reduced_constant_expression_p uses initializer_constant_valid_p to determine what is a valid constant expression. That accepts several cases which aren't compile time INTEGER_CST, just something that the assembler can finalize into a constant, e.g. difference of labels, difference of

[PATCH] Fix gimple-ssa-sprintf.c ICE (PR tree-optimization/83198)

Hi! This patch fixes 2 issues in format_floating. One is that when determining precision, we should consider solely the type *printf* will read the argument as (i.e. double unless L or ll modifier is used, in which case long double), not the type of the argument, because the corresponding

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Allow memmov/memset builtin expansion to use unaligned vsx on p8/p9

Hi! On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 02:07:44PM -0600, Aaron Sawdey wrote: > This patch allows the use of unaligned vsx loads/stores for builtin > expansion of memset and memcmp on p8/p9. Performance of unaligned vsx > instructions is good on these processors. > > OK for trunk if bootstrap/regtest on

Re: [C++] Add support for #pragma GCC unroll v4

On 12/06/2017 03:50 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: this is the (hopefully) final implementation of the support for the unrolling pragma in the C++ front-end. This needs some C++ tests, particularly with templates and range-for. I suspect that using the pragma in a template will ICE. Jason

Re: [PATCH] diagnose attribute conflicts on conversion operators (PR 83394)

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > The attached update also fixes both instances of the ICE > reported in bug 83322 and supersedes Jakub's patch for that > bug (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00765.html). > This passes bootstrap on x86_64 with

[PATCH v2] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 10:47 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 12/13/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > Alternately we could to the dom_walker ctor that an initial state > > > of > > > EDGE_EXECUTABLE is already set. > > > > I'm quite sure that wouldn't help for VRP. > > Not sure why.

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/59568 fix error handling for std::complex stream extraction

On 13/12/17 18:42 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: The bug here is that we called putback even if the initial __is >> __ch extraction failed and set eofbit, and putback clears the eofbit. I found a number of other problems though, such as not even trying to call putback after failing to find the

Re: [PATCH] PR libgcc/83112, Fix warnings on libgcc float128-ifunc.c

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 04:56:36PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:04:55AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 03:57:51PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > > > > > +extern KCtype __divkc3 (KFtype, KFtype, KFtype, KFtype); > > > > > + > > > > >

[PATCH, rs6000] Allow memmov/memset builtin expansion to use unaligned vsx on p8/p9

This patch allows the use of unaligned vsx loads/stores for builtin expansion of memset and memcmp on p8/p9. Performance of unaligned vsx instructions is good on these processors. OK for trunk if bootstrap/regtest on ppc64le passes? 2017-12-13  Aaron Sawdey  

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/59568 fix error handling for std::complex stream extraction

The bug here is that we called putback even if the initial __is >> __ch extraction failed and set eofbit, and putback clears the eofbit. I found a number of other problems though, such as not even trying to call putback after failing to find the ',' and ')' characters. I decided to rewrite the

Re: [PATCH] diagnose attribute conflicts on conversion operators (PR 83394)

The attached update also fixes both instances of the ICE reported in bug 83322 and supersedes Jakub's patch for that bug (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00765.html). This passes bootstrap on x86_64 with no new regressions (there are an increasing number of failures on trunk at the

Re: [PATCH] Verify allowed stmts before labels

On 12/13/2017 07:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > PR83391/PR83396 failed because debug bind stmts were put before labels. > Alex said that is undesirable, and that right now we want to allow > just debug begin stmt markers before or intermixed with labels. > > This patch ensures that

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On 12/13/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> Alternately we could to the dom_walker ctor that an initial state of >> EDGE_EXECUTABLE is already set. > > I'm quite sure that wouldn't help for VRP. Not sure why. But it's not worth digging deep into. I do think the current structure could

Re: [C++ Patch] PR 81061 ("[7/8 Regression] ICE modifying read-only variable")

OK. On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > in this simple error recovery regression we ICE during gimplification after > sensible diagnostic about assigning to a read-only location. The problem can > be avoided by simply returning immediately

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On 12/13/2017 09:55 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2017, David Malcolm wrote: > >> There didn't seem to be a pre-existing way to determine the unique >> out-edge after a GIMPLE_COND (if it has a constant cond), so I added >> a new gimple_cond_get_unique_successor_edge function.

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

Hi Jakub, >> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 02:31:07PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: >>> Hi Jakub, >>> >>> > Here it is everything in patch form, in case some volunteers are willing >>> > to >>> > test it on their targets, because we need faster turn-arounds for this. >>> >>> thanks for that: it's easy

Re: Add support for conditional reductions using SVE CLASTB

On 11/17/2017 08:29 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch uses SVE CLASTB to optimise conditional reductions. It means > that we no longer need to maintain a separate index vector to record > the most recent valid value, and no longer need to worry about overflow > cases. > > Tested on

Re: [PATCH PR81228][AARCH64] Fix ICE by adding LTGT in vec_cmp

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 04:45:33PM +, Sudi Das wrote: > On 13/12/17 16:42, Sudakshina Das wrote: > > Hi > > > > This patch is a follow up to the existing discussions on > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01904.html > > Bin had earlier submitted a patch to fix the ICE that

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

Hi, On Tue, 12 Dec 2017, David Malcolm wrote: > There didn't seem to be a pre-existing way to determine the unique > out-edge after a GIMPLE_COND (if it has a constant cond), so I added > a new gimple_cond_get_unique_successor_edge function. Similarly, > something similar may apply for

Re: Allow gather loads to be used for grouped accesses

On 11/17/2017 03:04 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Following on from the previous patch for strided accesses, this patch > allows gather loads to be used with grouped accesses, if we otherwise > would need to fall back to VMAT_ELEMENTWISE. However, as the comment > says, this is restricted to

Re: Use gather loads for strided accesses

On 11/17/2017 03:02 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch tries to use gather loads for strided accesses, > rather than falling back to VMAT_ELEMENTWISE. > > Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu (with and without SVE), x86_64-linux-gnu > and powerpc64le-linux-gnu. OK to install? > > Richard > > >

Re: [PATCH PR81228][AARCH64] Fix ICE by adding LTGT in vec_cmp

On 13/12/17 16:42, Sudakshina Das wrote: Hi This patch is a follow up to the existing discussions on https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01904.html Bin had earlier submitted a patch to fix the ICE that occurs because of the missing LTGT in aarch64-simd.md. That discussion opened up

[PATCH PR81228][AARCH64] Fix ICE by adding LTGT in vec_cmp

Hi This patch is a follow up to the existing discussions on https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg01904.html Bin had earlier submitted a patch to fix the ICE that occurs because of the missing LTGT in aarch64-simd.md. That discussion opened up a new bug report PR81647 for an

Re: Use single-iteration epilogues when peeling for gaps

On 11/17/2017 08:38 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch adds support for fully-masking loops that require peeling > for gaps. It peels exactly one scalar iteration and uses the masked > loop to handle the rest. Previously we would fall back on using a > standard unmasked loop instead. > >

[committed] sel-sched: fix sel_rank_for_schedule for qsort (PR 82398)

Hello, I have applied the following patch (ack'ed by Andrey) to fix PR 82398. The patch pasted in the Bugzilla also had a gcc_checking_assert for VINSN_UNIQUE_P vs. SCHED_GROUP_P consistency verification earlier in that comparator, but it's not directly related to the problem at hand, and Andrey

Re: Add support for vectorising live-out values using SVE LASTB

On 11/17/2017 08:24 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch uses the SVE LASTB instruction to optimise cases in which > a value produced by the final scalar iteration of a vectorised loop is > live outside the loop. Previously this situation would stop us from > using a fully-masked loop. > >

Re: Add support for reductions in fully-masked loops

On 11/17/2017 07:59 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch removes the restriction that fully-masked loops cannot > have reductions. The key thing here is to make sure that the > reduction accumulator doesn't include any values associated with > inactive lanes; the patch adds a bunch of

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On 13 December 2017 at 11:45, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:28:22AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> Formatting, this should be >> bool can_move_early_debug_stmts >> = ... >> and the line is too long, so needs to be wrapped. >> >> Furthermore, I must say

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On December 13, 2017 5:18:16 PM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law wrote: >On 12/13/2017 09:02 AM, David Malcolm wrote: >> On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 08:46 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: >>> On 12/13/2017 03:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On December 12, 2017 9:50:38 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On 12/13/2017 09:02 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 08:46 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 12/13/2017 03:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On December 12, 2017 9:50:38 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm >> redhat.com> wrote: PR tree-optimization/83312 reports a false positive

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On 12/13/2017 12:25 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: On 12 December 2017 21:15:25 CET, Martin Sebor wrote: Tested on x86_64-linux. I assume this test worked even before this patch. Of the tests added by the patch, strlenopt-37.c passes without the compiler changes

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 08:46 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 12/13/2017 03:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On December 12, 2017 9:50:38 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm > redhat.com> wrote: > > > PR tree-optimization/83312 reports a false positive from > > > -Warray-bounds. > > > The root

Re: [PATCH] Fix https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83396#c28 on ia64 (PR bootstrap/83396)

On Dez 13 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I think there are 2 issues. One is that the ia64 backend emits > the group barrier insns before BB_HEAD label, so it isn't part of a bb, > but has BLOCK_FOR_INSN of the following block, that looks invalid to me > and the ia64.c hunk ought

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On 12/13/2017 03:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On December 12, 2017 9:50:38 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm > wrote: >> PR tree-optimization/83312 reports a false positive from >> -Warray-bounds. >> The root cause is that VRP both: >> >> (a) updates a GIMPLE_COND to be always

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:45:51AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:28:22AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > Formatting, this should be > > > bool can_move_early_debug_stmts > > > = ... > > > and the line is too long, so

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:34:04AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > 2017-12-13 Jakub Jelinek > > > > PR bootstrap/83396 > > * final.c (rest_of_handle_final): Call variable_tracking_main only > > if !flag_var_tracking. >

Re: [PATCH] Verify allowed stmts before labels

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > PR83391/PR83396 failed because debug bind stmts were put before labels. > Alex said that is undesirable, and that right now we want to allow > just debug begin stmt markers before or intermixed with labels. > > This patch ensures that through

[RFC PATCH] Avoid PRED_NEGATIVE_RETURN prediction on likely -1/0/1 comparison functions (PR middle-end/81914)

Hi! While the PRED_NEGATIVE_RETURN heuristics generally works quite well, for qsort comparison functions and similar, including the planned C++ spaceship operator <=> where typically negative and positive are approximately even it doesn't work that well. This patch is an attempt to at least

[PATCH] Fix https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83396#c28 on ia64 (PR bootstrap/83396)

Hi! I think there are 2 issues. One is that the ia64 backend emits the group barrier insns before BB_HEAD label, so it isn't part of a bb, but has BLOCK_FOR_INSN of the following block, that looks invalid to me and the ia64.c hunk ought to fix that, except that I don't have access to ia64

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

Hi Jakub, > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 02:31:07PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: >> Hi Jakub, >> >> > Here it is everything in patch form, in case some volunteers are willing to >> > test it on their targets, because we need faster turn-arounds for this. >> >> thanks for that: it's easy to loose track

[wwwdocs] mention AVR additions

This adds AVR improvements to v8 Release Notes. Ok? Johann Index: changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.22 diff -r1.22 changes.html 179c179,240 < --- > AVR > > > The

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:34:04AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > 2017-12-13 Jakub Jelinek > > PR bootstrap/83396 > * final.c (rest_of_handle_final): Call variable_tracking_main only > if !flag_var_tracking. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, i686-linux

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:45:51AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:28:22AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Formatting, this should be > > bool can_move_early_debug_stmts > > = ... > > and the line is too long, so needs to be wrapped. > > > > Furthermore, I must say

[PATCH] Verify allowed stmts before labels

Hi! PR83391/PR83396 failed because debug bind stmts were put before labels. Alex said that is undesirable, and that right now we want to allow just debug begin stmt markers before or intermixed with labels. This patch ensures that through verification, which is what defines what is and isn't

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 02:31:07PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: > Hi Jakub, > > > Here it is everything in patch form, in case some volunteers are willing to > > test it on their targets, because we need faster turn-arounds for this. > > thanks for that: it's easy to loose track in this maze ;-)

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

Hi Jakub, > Here it is everything in patch form, in case some volunteers are willing to > test it on their targets, because we need faster turn-arounds for this. thanks for that: it's easy to loose track in this maze ;-) I've just bootstrapped sparc-sun-solaris2.11 with your patch and this one:

[PATCH] combine: Fix PR83393

In move_deaths we move a REG_DEAD note if the instruction combination has extended the lifetime of a register so that the existing note is no longer valid. We find that note using reg_stat, but what that finds can refer to a later insn. If so, we cannot use the cached value. This patch

Re: patch to fix PR82353

On 10/16/2017 10:38 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: This is another version of the patch to fix    https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82353 The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86-64 with Go and Ada. Committed as rev. 253796. Hi Vladimir, AFAIU this bit of the patch makes

Re: [PATCH] Fix Bug 83237 - Values returned by std::poisson_distribution are not distributed correctly

On 12/12/17 21:37 +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi, On 12/12/2017 19:42, Michele Pezzutti wrote: Hi. Yes, I looked at the text before submitting the patch. I contacted Devroye and he confirmed that another reader had also pointed out this bug but not the solution. I sent him my proposed

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:28:22AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Formatting, this should be > bool can_move_early_debug_stmts > = ... > and the line is too long, so needs to be wrapped. > > Furthermore, I must say I don't understand why > can_move_early_debug_stmts should care whether there

[PATCH] RL78 bswaphi improvement

Hello, The following patch helps GCC to generate xch instruction. The patch is being useful in many test cases from c-torture, for example in gcc.c-torture/execute/pr52760.c xch is being generated 4 times in foo and the code size for foo is being reduced from 94 to 58 bytes. Regression test is

[C++ Patch] PR 81061 ("[7/8 Regression] ICE modifying read-only variable")

Hi, in this simple error recovery regression we ICE during gimplification after sensible diagnostic about assigning to a read-only location. The problem can be avoided by simply returning immediately error_mark_node upon cxx_readonly_error - the rest of the function does the same, ie,

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 05:22:32AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Dec 12, 2017, Rainer Orth wrote: > > > Hi David, > >> Something in this series broke bootstrap on AIX, probably Power in general. > > > I'm seeing the same in a sparc-sun-solaris2.11 bootstrap.

Re: [patch, fortran] Implement maxval for characters

On 11 December 2017 at 18:58, Thomas Koenig wrote: > >> I have created https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83379 >> and assigned it to myself. This should be easy to fix. > > > OK, I have updated the test cases in question. They pass for > me at least. > > I'll

Re: [PATCH] vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On December 12, 2017 9:50:38 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm wrote: >PR tree-optimization/83312 reports a false positive from >-Warray-bounds. >The root cause is that VRP both: > >(a) updates a GIMPLE_COND to be always false, and > >(b) updates an ARRAY_REF in the

Re: [C++] Add support for #pragma GCC unroll v4

Ping for the last missing bits of the #pragma GCC unroll support: > this is the (hopefully) final implementation of the support for the > unrolling pragma in the C++ front-end. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00298.html Thanks in advance. -- Eric Botcazou

[PATCH] x86: don't use AVX512BW vmovdqu variants without -mavx512bw

Simply mirror the MODE_XI logic of handling unaligned operands in mov_internal into MODE_TI / MODE_OI handling. gcc/ 2017-12-13 Jan Beulich * sse.md (mov_internal): Tighten condition for when to use vmovdqu for TI and OI modes. gcc/testsuite/ 2017-12-13

[Ada] Make sure subprogram locus is initialized

This is another fixlet aimed at making gigi more robust in the presence of unexpected nodes in the expanded code. Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline and 7 branch. 2017-12-13 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/trans.c (Subprogram_Body_to_gnu):

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 05:21:01AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > index ..098a1101a3f4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/pr83391.C > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > +/* PR debug/83391 */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ If you put this into dg-torture.exp, please add: /* { dg-options

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

Hi Alexandre Oliva writes: > On Dec 12, 2017, Rainer Orth wrote: > >> Hi David, >>> Something in this series broke bootstrap on AIX, probably Power in general. > >> I'm seeing the same in a sparc-sun-solaris2.11 bootstrap. > > The AIX patch,

[Ada] Add small sanity check for package freezing

In order to implement the complex elaboration rules of the languages, the front-end inserts freeze nodes in the expanded code to mark spots from where package bodies can be translated by gigi. It can do so for packages with or without bodies now so a small sanity check is necessary. Tested on

[Ada] Fix spurious warning on function imported from C in LTO mode

We treat System.Address as equivalent to void* for functions imported from C and other languages, but the existing implementation was not very robust. Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline and 7 branch. 2017-12-13 Eric Botcazou *

Re: [PATCH][GCC][ARM] Fix fragile arm fpu attribute tests.

On 12 December 2017 at 18:29, Tamar Christina wrote: > Hi All, > > The previous test made use of arm_neon.h which made the whole test > rather fragile and only applicable to some of the arm targets. > > So instead I make use of different fpus now to test the generation of

Re: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 05:34:22AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > We skip debug insns and notes after a call that needs a nop_endbr, but > since a debug insn could be the last in a block, it may affect the loc > in the emitted nop_endbr insn. Although this has no effect on > codegen, it does

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 05:29:28AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Regstrapping; I suppose I could install it as obvious, but... Ok to install? > > > [SFN] don't eliminate regs in markers > > Eliminate regs in debug bind insns, but not in markers. > > for gcc/ChangeLog > > PR