P2085 clarified that a defaulted comparison operator must be the first
declaration of the function. Rejecting that avoids the ICE trying to
compare the noexcept-specifications.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
2020-04-24 Jason Merrill
PR c++/94583
Hi!
On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 07:18:25AM +0200, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Since commit e154242724b084380e3221df7c08fcdbd8460674 the flag -many is
> sometimes not passed to the assembler. Use .machine ppc to prevent
> errors if these files are assembled for an ISA which does not support
> FPRs.
>
>
Hi,
This patch merges the D front-end implementation with upstream dmd
09db0c41e, and the D runtime library with upstream druntime e68a5ae3.
* New core.math.toPrec templates have been added as an intrinsic.
Some floating point algorithms, such as Kahan-Babuska-Neumaier
Summation, require
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 04:47:31PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 4/17/20 12:59 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> > Hello Segher,
> >
> > would you mind having a look at this patch.
> >
>
> His patch is here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/543396.html
(And at
On Fri, 2020-04-24 at 17:22 -0500, Qing Zhao wrote:
> Hi, Dave,
>
> Thanks a lot for the review and comments.
> I just updated the patch with all your suggestions, bootstrapped it
> and run regression test, no any issue.
>
> The newest patch is attached with this email.
>
> Richard/Jakub,
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 8:25 PM Joel Jones wrote:
>
> Yes, Bellsoft's contribution is to be covered under the Marvell copyright
>
> assignment, as this is a work for hire.
Thanks !
Ramana
>
>
>
> Joel
>
>
>
> >Yes, Bellsoft's contribution is to be covered under the Marvell copyright
>
>
Hi, Dave,
Thanks a lot for the review and comments.
I just updated the patch with all your suggestions, bootstrapped it and run
regression test, no any issue.
The newest patch is attached with this email.
Richard/Jakub, please advise on whether I can commit this patch to Gcc10?
Thanks a lot.
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:53:03AM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> 2020-04-21 Michael Meissner
>
> * config/rs6000/linux64.h (PCREL_SUPPORTED_BY_OS): Define to
> enable PC-relative addressing for -mcpu=future.
> * config/rs6000/rs6000-cpus.def (ISA_FUTURE_MASKS_SERVER):
On 4/17/20 12:59 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello Segher,
>
> would you mind having a look at this patch.
>
His patch is here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/543396.html
Peter
Hi,
The order of precedence used by the upstream reference compiler for
determining what library to link against is:
- No library if -nophoboslib or -fno-druntime was seen.
- The library passed to -debuglib if -g was also seen.
- The library passed to -defaultlib
- The in-tree libgphobos library.
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 09:57:31PM +0800, guojiufu wrote:
> Previously -fweb was disabled if only unroll small loops. After that
> we find there is cases where it could help to rename pseudos and aovid
> some anti-dependence which may occur after unroll.
>
> Below is a patch to disable
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 07:59:02AM +0200, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> would you mind having a look at this patch.
Hi!
I see no patch?
Segher
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 01:35:15PM +0800, luoxhu wrote:
> On 2020/4/17 08:52, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:11:43AM +0800, luoxhu wrote:
> >> frame_pointer_needed is set to true in reload pass setup_can_eliminate,
> >> but regs_ever_live[31] is false,
On 4/24/20 4:19 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On aarch64 -mbranch-protection=pac-ret reuses the dwarf
opcode for window_save to mean "toggle the return address
mangle state", but in the dwarf2cfi internal logic the
state was not updated when an opcode was emitted, the
currently present update logic
On 4/24/20 1:12 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
finish_call_expr already has code to set current_function_returns_abnormally
if a template calls a noreturn function, but on the following testcase it
doesn't call a FUNCTION_DECL, but TEMPLATE_DECL instead, in which case
we didn't check noreturn at
On 4/24/20 3:52 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
This adds a note suggesting to enable concepts whenever 'requires' is parsed as
an invalid type name with concepts disabled.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK to commit?
OK.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* parser.c
On 4/23/20 7:08 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 02:48:38PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 4/22/20 11:27 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This test is rejected with a bogus "use of deleted function" error
starting with r225705 whereby convert_like_real/ck_base no longer
sets
This adds a note suggesting to enable concepts whenever 'requires' is parsed as
an invalid type name with concepts disabled.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK to commit?
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* parser.c (cp_parser_diagnose_invalid_type_name): Suggest to
Since ld is Intel CET enabled on Intel CET enabled host, dlopen fails on
liblto_plugin.so if it isn't Intel CET enabled. Add GCC_CET_HOST_FLAGS
to cet.m4, use it in libiberty and lto-plugin to always enable Intel
CET in liblto_plugin.so on Intel CET enabled host.
On Linux/x86 host, enable Intel
This patch fixes a bug in which the high-part of a 64-bit add doesn't
always merge in the masked lanes properly, depending on register allocation.
Unfortunately I don't have a small reproducer for this one, so there's
no testcase.
Andrew
amdgcn: Fix wrong-code bug in 64-bit masked add
The PR shows the compiler crashing with -mvsx -mlittle -O0. This turns
out to be caused by a failure to make of the higher bits in an index
endian conversion.
Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64} and on powerpc64le-linux.
Committing to trunk.
(This will need backports).
Segher
2020-04-24
On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As the new testcase shows, it is not safe to assume we can optimize
> a conditional store into an automatic non-addressable var, we can do it
> only if we can prove that the unconditional load or store actually will
> not be outside of the
Here is the patch introducing thunderxt311 maching model
for the scheduler. A name for the new chip was added to the
list of the names to be recognized as a valid parameter for mcpu
and mtune flags. The TX2 cost model was reused for TX3.
The previously used "cryptic" name for the command line
Hi!
finish_call_expr already has code to set current_function_returns_abnormally
if a template calls a noreturn function, but on the following testcase it
doesn't call a FUNCTION_DECL, but TEMPLATE_DECL instead, in which case
we didn't check noreturn at all and just assumed it could return.
On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 21:08 +0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 11:57:02AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > I haven't added (yet) checks if the alternate compiler does support these
> > options (I think that can be done incrementally), so for now this
Hi!
As the new testcase shows, it is not safe to assume we can optimize
a conditional store into an automatic non-addressable var, we can do it
only if we can prove that the unconditional load or store actually will
not be outside of the boundaries of the variable.
If the offset and size are
This patch changes the split-point of 64-bit moves to after register
allocation. This means that LRA sees a simpler instruction stream, and
seems to produce better code on some testcases.
Andrew
amdgcn: Split 64-bit constant loads post-reload
This helps avoid spilling 64-bit constant loads to
The 04/24/2020 15:17, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Szabolcs Nagy writes:
> > @@ -2221,6 +2239,14 @@ change_cfi_row (dw_cfi_row *old_row, dw_cfi_row
> > *new_row)
> >cfi->dw_cfi_opc = DW_CFA_GNU_window_save;
> >add_cfi (cfi);
> > }
> > +
> > + if (old_row->ra_mangled !=
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 04:52:46AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2020, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 05:08:55AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> >> I wasn't sure simplify_gen_subreg might possibly emit any code in
> >> obscure cases,
>
> > It never does,
Hello,
This patches changes the constraint "e" to "Te".
Regression tested on arm-none-eabi and found no regressions.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Srinath.
gcc/ChangeLog:
2020-04-24 Srinath Parvathaneni
* config/arm/constraints.md (e): Remove constraint.
(Te): Define constraint.
Szabolcs Nagy writes:
> @@ -2221,6 +2239,14 @@ change_cfi_row (dw_cfi_row *old_row, dw_cfi_row
> *new_row)
>cfi->dw_cfi_opc = DW_CFA_GNU_window_save;
>add_cfi (cfi);
> }
> +
> + if (old_row->ra_mangled != new_row->ra_mangled)
> +{
> + dw_cfi_ref cfi = new_cfi ();
>
This patch tweaks the testsuite expectations for amdgcn.
The result on the testsuite is a lot of removed failures, some new
passes, and a few new fails that are at least accurate.
Andrew
amdgcn: Testsuite tweaks
The vector size chosen here is for V64DImode. The concept of this setting is
not
On 23/04/20 09:23 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 23/04/20 06:32 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:12:37AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Now you are probably going to say that "-isystem /usr/include" is a bad
idea and that you shouldn't do that.
Right.
I'm
On 16/03/20 22:54 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
The service_already_exists exception type specified in the TS doesn't
have any constructors defined. Since its base class isn't default
constructible, that means has no usable constructors. This may be a
defect in the TS.
This patch fixes it by
Hi,
This is a version of the reproducer in the PR, usable on multiple platforms.
tested on x86_64-linux/darwin, powerpc64-linux,
pushed to master,
thanks
Iain
gcc/testsuite/
2020-04-24 Iain Sandoe
PR c++/94288
* g++.dg/coroutines/pr94288.C: New test.
diff --git
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 10:03, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote:
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Srinath Parvathaneni
> > Sent: 22 April 2020 14:00
> > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> > Subject: [GCC][PATCH][ARM]: Modify the MVE polymorphic variant
> > arguments to match
On 24/04/20 12:17 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24/04/20 12:57 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This no longer works, so direct people to the mailman listinfo pages
instead.
OK to commit to wwwdocs?
Yes, thank you!
I was wondering whether we could
On 24/04/20 12:57 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This no longer works, so direct people to the mailman listinfo pages
instead.
OK to commit to wwwdocs?
Yes, thank you!
I was wondering whether we could keep something similar to this nice
form, but
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 08:15:36AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:54 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > > > What is wrong with DF?
> > > >
> > > > It's slow and memory hungry?
> > >
> > > Very true, of course. But can this be significantly better?
> >
> > That's a good
I've had a couple of conversations now in which the shortness
of arm_sve.h was causing confusion, with people thinking that
the types and intrinsics were missing. It seems worth adding
a comment to explain what's going on.
Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, pushed.
Richard
2020-04-24 Richard
On Thu, 23 Apr 2020, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> This no longer works, so direct people to the mailman listinfo pages
> instead.
>
> OK to commit to wwwdocs?
Yes, thank you!
I was wondering whether we could keep something similar to this nice
form, but could not come up with a good way. So a
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 10:38, Andre Vieira (lists)
wrote:
>
> On 10/04/2020 14:55, Christophe Lyon via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Several ARM/MVE tests can be compiled even if the toolchain does not
> > support -mfloat-abi=hard (softfp is OK).
> >
> > Use dg-add-options arm_v8_1m_mve or
On Apr 23, 2020, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Sure. I'd go with _fileio but that's just a suggestion.
Okiedokie, here's the patch using fileio instead of tmpnam for the
effective target name. I'm going to check it in shortly.
introduce target fileio and require it in tests that use tmpnam
Some
On aarch64 -mbranch-protection=pac-ret reuses the dwarf
opcode for window_save to mean "toggle the return address
mangle state", but in the dwarf2cfi internal logic the
state was not updated when an opcode was emitted, the
currently present update logic is only valid for the
original sparc use of
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 9:52 AM Zhanghaijian (A)
wrote:
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2020 2:19 PM
> > To: Zhanghaijian (A)
> > Cc: Segher Boessenkool ;
> > gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: Re:
> -Original Message-
> From: Andre Vieira (lists)
> Sent: 24 April 2020 08:49
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov
> Subject: [PATCH][wwwdocs] Add -moutline-atomics for AArch64 on gcc-9 and
> gcc-8
>
> Add the backported functionality of -moutline-atomics for AArch64 to
Hello, Segher,
On Apr 23, 2020, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 05:08:55AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> I wasn't sure simplify_gen_subreg might possibly emit any code in
>> obscure cases,
> It never does, it just returns an RTX. Where would it emit the insns to?
I'm
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2020 2:19 PM
> To: Zhanghaijian (A)
> Cc: Segher Boessenkool ;
> gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH PR94708] rtl combine should consider NaNs when generate
> fp min/max
>
Add the backported functionality of -moutline-atomics for AArch64 to the
gcc-9 and gcc-8 changes.html
Validates. Is this OK?
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-8/changes.html
index
83dd1bc010a6e4debb76790b3fe62275bf0e0657..83e57db181294110f71a5d59960fb4d3fed7be98
100644
---
Hi.
One can also have enabled gcc_checking_assert in a release build
and that's why coro_body_contains_bind_expr_p can't be guarded
in a CHECKING_P macro.
I'm going to install it as obvious. I've just tested both release and
non-release builds.
Thanks,
Martin
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
2020-04-24
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 5:05 AM Zhanghaijian (A)
wrote:
>
> Thanks for your suggestions. For safety, I put back
> flag_unsafe_math_optimizations.
> Attached please find the v3 patch which is suitable for git am. Bootstrap and
> tested on aarch64 Linux platform.
> Is the v3 patch ok?
OK.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:54 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > > > What is wrong with DF?
> > >
> > > It's slow and memory hungry?
> >
> > Very true, of course. But can this be significantly better?
>
> That's a good question worth investigating in my opinion, because DF didn't
> quite achieve its
52 matches
Mail list logo
