Re: [PATCH V4 02/11] opt-functions.awk: fix comparison of limit, begin and end

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 1:47 AM Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > function integer_range_info(range_option, init, option) > { > if (range_option != "") { > - start = nth_arg(0, range_option); > - end = nth_arg(1, range_option); > + init = init + 0; > + start = nth_arg(0,

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/91428 - warn about std::is_constant_evaluated in if constexpr

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 5:50 PM Marek Polacek wrote: > > As discussed in 91428 and in > , > > if constexpr (std::is_constant_evaluated ()) > // ... > else > // ... > > always evaluates the true branch.

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/81676 - bogus -Wunused warnings in constexpr if

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:10 PM Marek Polacek wrote: > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 02:20:53PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote: > > On 8/19/19 11:28 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 06:20:20PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > > On 8/16/19 2:29 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > > > This

[PATCH] PR fortran/91551 -- ALLOCATED has one argument

The attach patch was built and tested on i586-*-freebsd. It includes a check for ALLOCATED with no arguments. OK to commit? 2019-08-28 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/91551 * intrinsic.c (sort_actual): ALLOCATED has one argument. Check for no argument case. 2019-08-28

[PATCH] PR fortran/91564 -- Additonal checks on STATUS

The attached patch has been built and tested on x86_64-*-freebsd. It adds additional checks for the status dummy argument, and therby prevents an ICE. OK to commit? 2019-08-27 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/91564 * check.c (gfc_check_kill_sub): Additional checks on status dummy

Re: [PATCH V4 00/11] eBPF support for GCC

. The mul32 instruction zero-extends arguments and then performs a multiplication. Use the right pattern for this in bpf.md and name it umulsidi3. Sorry, here I meant to say that the mul32 instruction multiplies and then zero-extends its result.

[PATCH V4 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

This patch adds a port for the Linux kernel eBPF architecture to GCC. ChangeLog: * configure.ac: Support for bpf-*-* targets. * configure: Regenerate. contrib/ChangeLog: * config-list.mk (LIST): Disable go in bpf-*-* targets. gcc/ChangeLog: * config.gcc: Support for bpf-*-*

[PATCH V4 02/11] opt-functions.awk: fix comparison of limit, begin and end

The function integer_range_info makes sure that, if provided, the initial value fills in the especified range. However, it is necessary to convert the values to a numerical context before comparing, to make sure awk is using arithmetical order and not lexicographical order. gcc/ChangeLog:

[PATCH V4 09/11] bpf: adjust GCC testsuite to eBPF limitations

This patch makes many tests in gcc.dg and gcc.c-torture to be skipped in bpf-*-* targets. This is due to the many limitations imposed by eBPF to what would be perfectly valid C code: no support for more than 5 arguments to function calls, no support for indirect jumps, a very limited range for

[PATCH V4 11/11] bpf: add myself as the maintainer for the eBPF port

ChangeLog: * MAINTAINERS: Add myself as the maintainer of the eBPF port. Remove myself from Write After Approval section. --- ChangeLog | 5 + MAINTAINERS | 2 +- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index

[PATCH V4 07/11] bpf: gcc.target eBPF testsuite

This patch adds a new testsuite to gcc.target, with eBPF specific tests. Tests are included for: - Target specific diagnostics. - All built-in functions. testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.target/bpf/bpf.exp: New file. * gcc.target/bpf/builtin-load.c: Likewise. *

[PATCH V4 10/11] bpf: manual updates for eBPF

gcc/ChangeLog: * doc/invoke.texi (Option Summary): Cover eBPF. (eBPF Options): New section. * doc/extend.texi (BPF Built-in Functions): Likewise. (BPF Kernel Helpers): Likewise. --- gcc/ChangeLog | 7 +++ gcc/doc/extend.texi | 171

[PATCH V4 04/11] testsuite: new require effective target indirect_calls

This patch adds a new dg_require_effective_target procedure to the testsuite infrastructure: indirect_calls. This new function tells whether a target supports calls to non-constant call targets. This patch also annotates the tests in the gcc.c-torture testuite that require support for indirect

[PATCH V4 00/11] eBPF support for GCC

[Differences from V3: . Formatting/style fixes: + Remove redundant braces. + Remove unneeded ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED. + Truncate too long lines. + Remove an odd line split. + Do not break after returns. + Use function_arg_info methods instead of auxiliary functions. + Fix indentation in

[PATCH V4 08/11] bpf: make target-supports.exp aware of eBPF

This patch makes the several effective target checks in target-supports.exp to be aware of eBPF targets. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_trampolines): Adapt to eBPF. (check_effective_target_stack_size): Likewise.

[PATCH V4 01/11] Update config.sub and config.guess.

* config.sub: Import upstream version 2019-06-30. * config.guess: Import upstream version 2019-07-24. --- ChangeLog| 5 ++ config.guess | 264 +++ config.sub | 50 +-- 3 files changed, 240 insertions(+), 79

[PATCH V4 06/11] bpf: new libgcc port

This patch adds an eBPF port to libgcc. As of today, compiled eBPF programs do not support a single-entry point schema. Instead, a BPF "executable" is a relocatable ELF object file containing multiple entry points, in certain named sections. Also, the BPF loaders in the kernel do not execute

[PATCH V4 03/11] testsuite: annotate c-torture/compile tests with dg-require-stack-size

This patch annotates tests that make use of a significant a mount of stack space. Embedded and other restricted targets may have problems compiling and running these tests. Note that the annotations are in many cases not exact. testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.c-torture/compile/2609-1.c:

Fix ICE from sprintf/strlen integration work

/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog index 37133de87f5..2560faf8526 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog +++ b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +2019-08-27 Jeff Law + + * gcc.c-torture/compile/20190827-1.c: New test. + 2019-08-27 Harald Anlauf PR fortran/91496 diff --git a/gcc

Re: [PATCH] correct an ILP32/LP64 bug in sprintf warning (PR 91567)

On 8/27/19 4:34 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > The recent sprintf+strlen integration doesn't handle unbounded > string lengths entirely correctly for ILP32 targets and causes > -Wformat-overflow false positives in some common cases, including > during GCC bootstrap targeting such systems  The attached 

Re: [PATCH] builtin fadd variants implementation

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019, Tejas Joshi wrote: > Hello. > I have made changes in the patch according to the above corrections. > However, I didn't understand how these following testcases are > supposed to handle. Will you please elaborate some more? > > > (E.g. fadd (0x1.01p0, FLT_MIN), as an

[PATCH] correct an ILP32/LP64 bug in sprintf warning (PR 91567)

The recent sprintf+strlen integration doesn't handle unbounded string lengths entirely correctly for ILP32 targets and causes -Wformat-overflow false positives in some common cases, including during GCC bootstrap targeting such systems The attached patch fixes that mistake. (I think this code

[PATCH] PR fortran/91565 -- Extra checks on ORDER

The attached ptch implements additional checks on the ORDER dummy argument for the RESHAPE intrinsic function. Built and regression tested on x86_64-*-freebsd. OK to commit? 2019-08-27 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/91565 * simplify.c (gfc_simplify_reshape): Add additional checks

C++ PATCH for c++/91428 - warn about std::is_constant_evaluated in if constexpr

As discussed in 91428 and in , if constexpr (std::is_constant_evaluated ()) // ... else // ... always evaluates the true branch. Someone in the SO post said "But hopefully compilers will just diagnose

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/81676 - bogus -Wunused warnings in constexpr if

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 02:20:53PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 8/19/19 11:28 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 06:20:20PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > On 8/16/19 2:29 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > > This patch is an attempt to fix the annoying -Wunused-but-set-* > >

Re: C++ PATCH to implement C++20 P1143R2, constinit (PR c++/91360)

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 09:54:50PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > On 14/08/19 23:22, Marek Polacek wrote: > > + /* [dcl.spec]/2 "At most one of the constexpr, consteval, and constinit > > + keywords shall appear in a decl-specifier-seq." */ > > + if (constinit_p && constexpr_p) > >

Re: C++ PATCH to implement C++20 P1143R2, constinit (PR c++/91360)

Hi, On 14/08/19 23:22, Marek Polacek wrote: + /* [dcl.spec]/2 "At most one of the constexpr, consteval, and constinit + keywords shall appear in a decl-specifier-seq." */ + if (constinit_p && constexpr_p) +{ + error_at (min_location (declspecs->locations[ds_constinit], +

Re: [PR fortran/91496] !GCC$ directives error if mistyped or unknown

Committed to trunk as svn revision 274966, after removing some accidentally left-over unused variable declarations (copy). The actual committed version is attached. Thanks, Paul, for the quick review! Unless there are strong objections, I'd like to commit this to 9-branch, too, so that this can

Re: [SVE] PR86753

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 21:14, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Richard should have the final say, but some comments... > > Prathamesh Kulkarni writes: > > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c > > index 1e2dfe5d22d..862206b3256 100644 > > --- a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c > > +++

Re: C++ PATCH to implement C++20 P1143R2, constinit (PR c++/91360)

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 03:10:37PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote: > > +/* True if DECL is declared 'constinit'. */ > > +#define DECL_DECLARED_CONSTINIT_P(DECL) \ > > + DECL_LANG_FLAG_0 (VAR_DECL_CHECK (STRIP_TEMPLATE (DECL))) > > Hmm, given that 'constinit' only affects the declaration, do we

[PATCH, i386]: Fix PR 91528, ICE in ix86_expand_prologue

When stack alignment is increased in convert_scalars_to_vector, we have to update several other dependant fields in crtl struct, similar to what expand_stack_alignment from cfgexpand.c does. 2019-08-27 Uroš Bizjak PR target/91528 * config/i386/i386-features.c

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

> +(define_expand "zero_extendsidi2" > + [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand") > + (zero_extend:DI (match_operand:SI 1 "reg_or_indirect_memory_operand")))] > + "" > +{ > + if (register_operand (operands[1], SImode)) > +{

[PATCH, testsuite]: Use -mfpmath=sse in gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-round-roundeven-?.c tests

Fix 32bit testing, where -mfpmath=387 is the default. 2019-08-27 Uroš Bizjak * gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-round-roundeven-1.c (dg-options): Add -mfpmath=sse. * gcc.target/i386/sse4_1-round-roundeven-2.c (dg-options): Ditto. Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu {,-m32}. Committed to mainline

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

Hi! On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:08:50PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Mostly trivial formatting comments, but I think there's still a couple > of substantive points too. Sorry to piggy-back on your review once again. > jema...@gnu.org (Jose E. Marchesi) writes: > > +static rtx > >

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 02:59:01PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > glglgl, scratch that, it is actually a 32-bit multiplication that then > gets extended to 64-bits: > > (define_insn "*mulsidi3_zeroextended" > [(set (match_operand:DI0 "register_operand" "=r,r") >

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

> +(define_expand "zero_extendsidi2" > + [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand") > + (zero_extend:DI (match_operand:SI 1 "reg_or_indirect_memory_operand")))] > + "" > +{ > + if (register_operand (operands[1], SImode)) > +{ > + operands[1] =

Re: [SVE] PR86753

Richard should have the final say, but some comments... Prathamesh Kulkarni writes: > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c > index 1e2dfe5d22d..862206b3256 100644 > --- a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c > +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c > @@ -1989,17 +1989,31 @@ check_load_store_masking

Re: [PATCH] integrate sprintf pass into strlen (PR 83431)

On 8/27/19 3:09 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote: On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 at 04:14, Jeff Law wrote: On 8/12/19 4:09 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: gcc-83431.diff PR tree-optimization/83431 - -Wformat-truncation may incorrectly report truncation gcc/ChangeLog: PR c++/83431 *

Re: [PATCH] Remove code leftover that has never been used.

On 8/27/19 8:04 AM, Martin Liška wrote: Hi. I would like to remove the leftover that hasn't been used since when it was introduced. Ready for trunk? It's fine with me, thank you. Martin

Re: [SVE] PR86753

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 17:29, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Richard Biener writes: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:58 AM Richard Sandiford > > wrote: > >> ifcvt produces: > >> > >>[local count: 1063004407]: > >> # i_34 = PHI > >> # ivtmp_5 = PHI > >> _1 = (long unsigned int) i_34; >

libgo patch committed: Rebuild runtime.inc if mkruntimeinc.sh changes

This libgo patch rebuilds runtime.inc if mkruntimeinc.sh changes. The Makefile was missing a dependency. Also remove runtime.inc.raw in mostlyclean. Bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian Index: gcc/go/gofrontend/MERGE

[PATCH] Remove code leftover that has never been used.

Hi. I would like to remove the leftover that hasn't been used since when it was introduced. Ready for trunk? Thanks, Martin gcc/ChangeLog: 2019-08-27 Martin Liska PR tree-optimization/90970 * builtins.c (check_access): Remove assignment to maxread as it hasn't been

Re: [RFC][vect]PR: 65930 teach vectorizer to handle SUM reductions with sign-change casts

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > > > Hi Richard, > > > > I have come up with a way to teach the vectorizer to handle sign-changing > > reductions, restricted to SUM operations as I'm not sure other reductions > > are > > equivalent

Re: [RFC][vect]PR: 65930 teach vectorizer to handle SUM reductions with sign-change casts

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi Richard, > > I have come up with a way to teach the vectorizer to handle sign-changing > reductions, restricted to SUM operations as I'm not sure other reductions are > equivalent with different signs. > > The main nature of this approach is

[PR 91468] Small fixes in ipa-cp.c and ipa-prop.c

Hi, Feng Xue read through much of ipa-cp.c and ipa-prop.c and reported a few redundancies and small errors in PR 91468. The patch below fixes all of them, specifically: 1) A typo in ipcp_modif_dom_walker::before_dom_children where a wrong tree variable was checked if it is not a

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

> +(define_insn "mulsidi3" > + [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=r,r") > +(sign_extend:DI > + (mult:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "0,0") > + (match_operand:SI 2 "reg_or_imm_operand"

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

Hi Richard. > +(define_insn "mulsidi3" > + [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand" "=r,r") > +(sign_extend:DI > + (mult:SI (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "0,0") > + (match_operand:SI 2 "reg_or_imm_operand" "r,I"]

Re: [PATCH] Share a prevailing name for remove debug info symbols w/ LTO.

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 1:31 PM Martin Liška wrote: > > On 8/27/19 12:40 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:28 AM Martin Liška wrote: > >> > >> Hi. > >> > >> The patch is about better symbol table manipulation > >> for debug info objects. The patch fixes reported issue > >>

Re: [PATCH][STV] More compile-time improvements

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 2:14 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > > With forcing STV for all chains I run into the same issue as I > fixed for the analysis phase which is looping over all defs > of a pseudo rather just those interesting. The following fixes > this by recording insn/pseudo pairs in

[PATCH][STV] More compile-time improvements

With forcing STV for all chains I run into the same issue as I fixed for the analysis phase which is looping over all defs of a pseudo rather just those interesting. The following fixes this by recording insn/pseudo pairs in mark_dual_mode_def; well, not actually pairs but tracking insns in

Re: [SVE] PR86753

Richard Biener writes: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:58 AM Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> ifcvt produces: >> >>[local count: 1063004407]: >> # i_34 = PHI >> # ivtmp_5 = PHI >> _1 = (long unsigned int) i_34; >> _2 = _1 * 2; >> _3 = a_23(D) + _2; >> _4 = *_3; >> _7 = b_24(D) +

Re: [PATCH] Share a prevailing name for remove debug info symbols w/ LTO.

On 8/27/19 12:40 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:28 AM Martin Liška wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> The patch is about better symbol table manipulation >> for debug info objects. The patch fixes reported issue >> on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. >> >> Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu

Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] Introduce can_vector_compare_p function

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:01 AM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Ilya Leoshkevich writes: > >> Am 26.08.2019 um 15:17 schrieb Ilya Leoshkevich : > >> > >>> Am 26.08.2019 um 15:06 schrieb Richard Biener > >>> : > >>> > >>> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 1:54 PM Ilya Leoshkevich > >>> wrote: > >

[C++ Patch] Improve check_var_type locations

Hi, by adding a location_t parameter we can improve the locations of the error messages. At the moment the locations of the first and third message end up being input_location anyway, but we can imagine improving those later (this a much more general issue, the locations we use when unnamed

Re: [PATCH V3 05/11] bpf: new GCC port

Mostly trivial formatting comments, but I think there's still a couple of substantive points too. jema...@gnu.org (Jose E. Marchesi) writes: > +/* Return the builtin code corresponding to the kernel helper builtin > + __builtin_NAME, or 0 if the name doesn't correspond to a kernel > + helper

Re: [SVE] PR86753

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:58 AM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Prathamesh Kulkarni writes: > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 14:48, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 11:13 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 at 19:43, Richard Sandiford > >> >

[committed] Fix libgomp scan* tests for non-avx_runtime testing (PR libgomp/91530)

Hi! On targets that aren't avx capable, but are sse2 capable, we don't actually pass -mavx nor -msse2, but expect vectorized messages that don't appear if -msse2 isn't the default. Fixed thusly, tested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, committed to trunk. 2019-08-27 Jakub Jelinek PR

Re: [PATCH] Share a prevailing name for remove debug info symbols w/ LTO.

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:28 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > Hi. > > The patch is about better symbol table manipulation > for debug info objects. The patch fixes reported issue > on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. > > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > > Ready to be

Re: [RFC] [AARCH64] Add support for new control bits CTR_EL0.DIC and CTR_EL0.IDC

Hi Shaokun, On 8/22/19 3:10 PM, Shaokun Zhang wrote: The DCache clean & ICache invalidation requirements for instructions to be data coherence are discoverable through new fields in CTR_EL0. Let's support the two bits if they are enabled, then we can get some performance benefit from this

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Simplify wrapped RTL op

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:12:32AM +0200, Robin Dapp wrote: > as announced in the wrapped-binop gimple patch mail, on s390 we still > emit odd code in front of loops: >aghi%r1,-8 >srlg%r1,%r1,3 >aghi%r1,1 This is done like this because %r1 might be 0. We see this same

[arm][aarch64] Add comments warning that stack-protector initializer insns shouldn't be split

Following the publication of https://kb.cert.org/vuls/id/129209/ I've been having a look at GCC's implementation for Arm and AArch64. I haven't identified any issues yet, but it's a bit early to be completely sure. One observation, however, is that the instruction sequence that initializes

Re: [SVE] PR86753

Prathamesh Kulkarni writes: > On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 14:48, Richard Biener > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 11:13 PM Prathamesh Kulkarni >> wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 at 19:43, Richard Sandiford >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Prathamesh Kulkarni writes: >> > > > On Fri, 23 Aug

Re: [PATCH V3 10/11] bpf: manual updates for eBPF

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 07:14:49PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > +@table @gcctabopt > +@item -mframe-limit=@var{bytes} > +This specifies the hard limit for frame sizes, in bytes. Currently, > +the value that can be specified should be less or equal than "less than or equal to". I didn't

Re: [PATCH V3 01/11] Update config.sub and config.guess.

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 07:14:40PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > * config.sub: Import upstream version 2019-06-30. > * config.guess: Import upstream version 2019-07-24. These fall under the "obvious" rule. Please make sure you install the current upstream version. Thanks,

Re: [PATCH] Sanitizing the middle-end interface to the back-end for strict alignment

Hi Bernd, On 8/15/19 8:47 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: Hi, this is the split out part from the "Fix not 8-byte aligned ldrd/strd on ARMv5 (PR 89544)" which is sanitizing the middle-end interface to the back-end for strict alignment, and a couple of bug-fixes that are necessary to survive

Re: [RFC PATCH, i386]: Improve STV pass by correcting the cost of moves to/from XMM reg

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:55 AM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is currently a heads-up patch that removes the minimum > > > > > > > > > limitation > > > > > > > > > of cost of moves to/from XMM reg. The immediate benefit is > > > > > > >

[PATCH/RFC] Simplify wrapped RTL op

Hi, as announced in the wrapped-binop gimple patch mail, on s390 we still emit odd code in front of loops: void v1 (unsigned long *in, unsigned long *out, unsigned int n) { int i; for (i = 0; i < n; i++) { out[i] = in[i]; } } --> aghi%r1,-8 srlg

Re: [PATCH] integrate sprintf pass into strlen (PR 83431)

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 at 04:14, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 8/12/19 4:09 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > > > gcc-83431.diff > > > > PR tree-optimization/83431 - -Wformat-truncation may incorrectly report > > truncation > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > > PR c++/83431 > > * gimple-ssa-sprintf.c

Re: [PR fortran/91496] !GCC$ directives error if mistyped or unknown

Hi Harald, This is OK for trunk. Thanks! Paul On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 22:13, Harald Anlauf wrote: > > Dear all, > > the attached patch adds Fortran support for the following pragmas > (loop annotations): IVDEP (ignore vector dependencies), VECTOR, and > NOVECTOR. Furthermore, it downgrades

Re: [RFC PATCH, i386]: Improve STV pass by correcting the cost of moves to/from XMM reg

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:55 AM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > > > > This is currently a heads-up patch that removes the minimum > > > > > > > > limitation > > > > > > > > of cost of moves to/from XMM reg. The immediate benefit is the > > > > > > > > removal > > > > > > > > of mismatched spills,

Re: [RFC PATCH, i386]: Improve STV pass by correcting the cost of moves to/from XMM reg

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 2:49 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2019, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 2:11 PM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 1:46 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > > > > > > >

[PATCH] Share a prevailing name for remove debug info symbols w/ LTO.

Hi. The patch is about better symbol table manipulation for debug info objects. The patch fixes reported issue on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. Ready to be installed? Thanks, Martin libiberty/ChangeLog: 2019-08-27 Martin Liska

Re: [Patch][PR91504] Inlining misses some logical operation folding

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 02:04:25PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2019, kamlesh kumar wrote: > > > +/* (~a & b) ^ a --> (a | b) */ > > > +(simplify > > > + (bit_xor:c (bit_and:cs (bit_not @0) @1) @0) > > > + (bit_ior @0 @1)) >

Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] Introduce can_vector_compare_p function

Ilya Leoshkevich writes: >> Am 26.08.2019 um 15:17 schrieb Ilya Leoshkevich : >> >>> Am 26.08.2019 um 15:06 schrieb Richard Biener : >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 1:54 PM Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > Am 26.08.2019 um 10:49 schrieb Richard Biener > : > > On Fri, Aug 23,