On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 05:47:32PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > but what happens to -fsignalling-nans -ffast-math then? Better leave those
> > in I'd say.
>
> Ah, it seems I was confused about the intended semantics here.
>
> I thought that a *more specific* option like -fsignalling-nans
On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 06:01:44PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Wilco Dijkstra writes:
> > Although GCC should understand the limited range of clz/ctz/cls results,
> > Combine sometimes behaves oddly and duplicates ctz to remove an unnecessary
> > sign extension. Avoid this by adding an
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 12:06:54PM +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Also, you don't need to emit "#" in output template. This is just for
> > extra safety, we can live without. Please see e.g. "*tzcnt_1".
>
> IMO it's better to keep it here, where we're relying on the split
> happening for
On 1/9/20 6:29 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 1/9/20 4:51 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> Splitting out separate functions in the testcase shouldn't be so much
>> work? Or am I too optimistic :-)
>>
>> This should make the test a good deal less prone to random changes in
>> output caused by the
ping
Jim
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:36 PM Jim Wilson wrote:
>
> The RISC-V toolchain doesn't support leb128 because of linker relaxation
> to reduce code size. This prevents us from computing the leb128 size of a
> value at compile time. So do a configure time gas feature check regardless
> of
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> I thought that a *more specific* option like -fsignalling-nans was always
> intended to override a more generic option like -ffast-math, no matter
> whether it comes before or after it on the command line.
Yes, that's correct. (There are cases where
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020, Richard Biener wrote:
> To me it's a QOI question that depends on the actual case.
> Turning memcpy (p, p, N) into a no-op is the correct thing,
> even though with (too) large N it might trap. Folding
> a read from outside of an object to zero might be OK
> (it's undefined),
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020, Martin Sebor wrote:
> I removed the trailing comma and (after a few false starts) managed
> to push the change in commit
> r10-6466-g297aa668293d55ffe100d810e92fbe592f262557.
>
> I got the error below for my first few attempts. The message had
> the expected format so I
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> This patch is for PR 79193 and 88999, problems where libstdc++ is
> mis-configuring itself when building for a bare-metal target because it thinks
> it can link programs without pulling in the BSP that provides low-level I/O
> support. (Specifically,
Hi!
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 05:16:14PM -0500, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> --- a/gcc/lra-assigns.c
> +++ b/gcc/lra-assigns.c
> @@ -964,6 +964,8 @@ spill_for (int regno, bitmap spilled_pseudo_bitmap, bool
> first_p)
>bitmap_clear (_pseudos_bitmap);
>for (j = hard_regno_nregs
On 2/7/20 3:29 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
When I implemented C++20 parenthesized initialization of aggregates
I introduced this bogus cp_unevaluated_operand check, thus disabling
this feature in unevaluated context. Oop.
Removing the check turned up another bug: I wasn't checking the
return
When I implemented C++20 parenthesized initialization of aggregates
I introduced this bogus cp_unevaluated_operand check, thus disabling
this feature in unevaluated context. Oop.
Removing the check turned up another bug: I wasn't checking the
return value of digest_init. So when
extract_local_specs wasn't finding the mention of 'an' as a template
argument because we weren't walking into template arguments. So here I
changed cp_walk_subtrees to do so--only walking into template arguments in
the spelling of the type or expression, not any hidden behind typedefs. The
Since basic_istream_view::iterator is neither a cpp17 iterator (because it's
move-only) nor does it define all four of the types {difference_type,
value_type, reference, iterator_category}, then by the rule in
[iterator.traits], its iterator_traits has no members.
More concretely this means that
Wilco Dijkstra writes:
> Hi Richard,
>
>> Could you go into more detail about what the before and after code
>> looks like, and what combine is doing? Like you say, this sounds
>> like a target-independent thing on face value.
>
> It is indeed, but it seems specific to instructions where we have
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 02:55:14PM +0100, Martin Liska wrote:
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2020-02-04 Martin Liska
>
> PR c/92472.
That trailing dot should not be there (in some other patches as well).
Segher
Roman Zhuykov writes:
> Hi!
> I've investigated a bit, because some of the following confused me while
> working with some local 9.2-based branch.
>
> Documentation issues:
> (0) See patch for install.texi at the bottom, two possible values are
> not documented. Ok for master? Backports?
> (1)
* include/bits/iterator_concepts.h (iter_difference_t, iter_value_t):
Use remove_cvref_t.
(readable_traits): Rename to indirectly_readable_traits.
(readable): Rename to indirectly_readable.
(writable): Rename to indirectly_writable.
The wrong type was being used in the __common_iter_has_arrow constraint,
creating a circular dependency where the iterator_traits specialization
was needed before it was complete. The correct parameter for the
__common_iter_has_arrow concept is the first template argument of the
common_iterator,
On 07/02/2020 16:43, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 14:49, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
On 07/02/2020 13:19, Christophe Lyon wrote:
When running the testsuite with -fdisable-rtl-fwprop2 and -mpure-code
for cortex-m0, I noticed that some testcases were failing because we
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 6:44 PM Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>>
>> Richard Sandiford writes:
>> > [...]
>> >> I'm not sure given the issues you've introduced if I could actually
>> >> fill out the matrix of answers without more underlying information.
>> >> ie, when can we
Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 6:01 PM Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > The overall effect of this patch is that now all component flags of
> > -ffast-math are treated exactly equivalently:
> > * they are set (changed from their default) with -ffast-math
> > * they are reset to
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 14:49, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
>
> On 07/02/2020 13:19, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > When running the testsuite with -fdisable-rtl-fwprop2 and -mpure-code
> > for cortex-m0, I noticed that some testcases were failing because we
> > still generate "ldr rX, .LCY", which
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 12:13:35PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> The names of split_before_sched2 ("split4") and split_before_regstack
> ("split3") do not reflect their insertion point in the sequence of passes,
> where split_before_regstack follows split_before_sched2. Reorder the code
> and rename
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 14:16 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:00 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 09:19 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 11:02 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > > On 2/4/20 2:31 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2020-02-04
On 07/02/20 09:46 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
Fixed and committed with that change. Thanks for the review!
I've just tested and pushed this fix.
commit 572992c8920d5339a3ac28d442c436d6daa0bfae
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Fri Feb 7 16:06:43 2020 +
libstdc++ Fix missing return in
Am Fr., 7. Feb. 2020 um 15:23 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely :
>
> On 07/02/20 10:04 +0100, Daniel Krügler wrote:
> >Am Do., 6. Feb. 2020 um 15:28 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely
> >:
> >>
> >> On 06/02/20 13:53 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >> >On 06/02/20 13:40 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 07:56 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 11:48:23AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> > Yea, it's closely related. In your case you need to effectively ignore
> > the nop insn to get the optimization you want. In mine that nop insn
> > causes an ICE.
> >
> >
On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 09:56:38AM +0100, Harwath, Frederik wrote:
> * {target-32.c, thread-limit-2.c}:
> no "usleep" implemented for nvptx. Cf. https://gcc.gnu.org/PR81690
Please don't, I want to deal with that using declare variant, just didn't
get yet around to finishing the last patch needed
Hi all,
On 27/01/2020 13:01, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Dennis Zhang writes:
[...]
gcc/ChangeLog:
2020-01-23 Dennis Zhang
* config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c (TYPES_TERNOP_SSUS): New macro.
* config/aarch64/aarch64-simd-builtins.def (simd_smmla): New.
(simd_ummla,
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 06/02/20 19:52 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > This patch adds ranges::basic_istream_view and ranges::istream_view. This
> > seems
> > to be the last missing part of the ranges header.
> >
> > libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
> >
> > *
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 06/02/20 18:53 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Feb 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > > +#ifdef __cpp_lib_threeway_comparison
> > >
> > > This macro is mispelled, should be three_way with an underscore.
> >
> > Oops! It looks like it's
On 07/02/20 10:04 +0100, Daniel Krügler wrote:
Am Do., 6. Feb. 2020 um 15:28 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely :
On 06/02/20 13:53 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>On 06/02/20 13:40 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>This reduces sizeof(std::partial_ordering) and optimizes conversion and
>>comparison
Hi,
Richard wrote:
> However, inside the compiler we really want to represent this as a
>shift.
...
> Ideally this would be handled inside the mid-end expansion of an
> extract, but in the absence of that I think this is best done inside the
> extv expansion so that we never end up with a real
Here we were swallowing all the syntax errors by parsing tentatively, and
returning error_mark_node without ever actually giving an error. Fixed by
using save_tokens/rollback_tokens instead.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
PR c++/92517
* parser.c
On 03/02/20 21:07 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
+ template
+struct binary_transform_result
+{
+ [[no_unique_address]] _Iter1 in1;
+ [[no_unique_address]] _Iter2 in2;
+ [[no_unique_address]] _Out out;
+
+ template
+ requires convertible_to &&
+ &&
On 07/02/2020 13:19, Christophe Lyon wrote:
When running the testsuite with -fdisable-rtl-fwprop2 and -mpure-code
for cortex-m0, I noticed that some testcases were failing because we
still generate "ldr rX, .LCY", which is what we want to avoid with
-mpure-code. This is latent since a recent
When running the testsuite with -fdisable-rtl-fwprop2 and -mpure-code
for cortex-m0, I noticed that some testcases were failing because we
still generate "ldr rX, .LCY", which is what we want to avoid with
-mpure-code. This is latent since a recent improvement in fwprop
(PR88833).
In this patch I
On 06/02/20 19:52 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
This patch adds ranges::basic_istream_view and ranges::istream_view. This seems
to be the last missing part of the ranges header.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* include/std/ranges (ranges::__detail::__stream_extractable,
Hi,
This is the first of the (small number of) anticipated changes to bring
the implementation into line with the latest published C++20 draft (this
is now expected to be very close to the final, although some wording
might still be adjusted).
The allocation for the coroutine state frame is
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 2:14 AM JonY <10wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/7/20 3:23 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 09:51:14PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 6:59 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>>
> >>> MS_ABI requires passing aggregates with only float/double in integer
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 2/6/20 7:52 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > The inliner folds stmts delayed, the following arranges things so
> > to not fold stmts that are obviously not reachable to avoid warnings
> > from those code regions.
> >
> > Bootstrapped and tested on
On 06/02/20 18:53 -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> +#ifdef __cpp_lib_threeway_comparison
This macro is mispelled, should be three_way with an underscore.
Oops! It looks like it's also mispelled in the definition of iota_view
earlier in this file.
dsd %xmm18, %xmm14, %xmm14
vaddsd %xmm18, %xmm14, %xmm18
vmovaps (%rsp), %xmm14
vmovaps 16(%rsp), %xmm18
addq$40, %rsp
ret
.seh_endproc
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 10.0.1 20200207 (experimental)"
Does whatever assembler mingw64 uses ev
On 2/6/20 6:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 01:00:36AM +, JonY wrote:
>> On 2/4/20 11:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 11:16:06AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
I guess that Comment #9 patch form the PR should be trivially correct,
On 2/7/20 3:23 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 09:51:14PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 6:59 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> MS_ABI requires passing aggregates with only float/double in integer
>>> registers. Checked gcc outputs against Clang and fixed:
>>>
>>> FAIL:
On 07/02/2020 02:12, Modi Mo via gcc-patches wrote:
I did a quick bootstrap, this shows several failures like:
gcc/builtins.c:9427:1: error: unrecognizable insn:
9427 | }
| ^
(insn 212 211 213 24 (set (reg:SI 207)
(zero_extract:SI (reg:SI 206)
(const_int 26
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 8:19 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> As the following testcase shows, unwind.h on ARM can't be (starting with GCC
> 10) compiled with -std=c* modes, only -std=gnu* modes.
> The problem is it uses asm keyword, which isn't a keyword in those modes
> (system headers vs.
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:08 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 2/6/20 6:16 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:00 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 09:19 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 11:02 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 2/4/20 2:31
Am Do., 6. Feb. 2020 um 15:28 Uhr schrieb Jonathan Wakely :
>
> On 06/02/20 13:53 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >On 06/02/20 13:40 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>This reduces sizeof(std::partial_ordering) and optimizes conversion and
> >>comparison operators to avoid conditional branches
Hi,
the libgomp testsuite contains some test cases (all in
/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c/)
which fail with nvptx offloading because of some long standing issues:
* {target-32.c, thread-limit-2.c}:
no "usleep" implemented for nvptx. Cf. https://gcc.gnu.org/PR81690
* target-{33,34}.c:
no
Hi!
As the following testcase shows, unwind.h on ARM can't be (starting with GCC
10) compiled with -std=c* modes, only -std=gnu* modes.
The problem is it uses asm keyword, which isn't a keyword in those modes
(system headers vs. non-system ones don't make a difference here).
glibc and other
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 9:05 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> After thinking some more on this, we can do better; rather than having to
> add a new prereload splitter pattern to catch all other cases where it might
> be beneficial to fold first part of an UNSPEC_CAST back to the unspec
>
Hi!
After thinking some more on this, we can do better; rather than having to
add a new prereload splitter pattern to catch all other cases where it might
be beneficial to fold first part of an UNSPEC_CAST back to the unspec
operand, this patch reverts the *.md changes I've made yesterday and
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 8:58 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> The following testcase ICEs. The generated split_insns starts
> with recog_data.insn = NULL and then tries to put various operands into
> recog_data.operand array and checks various splitter conditions.
> The problem is that some
55 matches
Mail list logo
