use -mno-strict-align for strlenopt-80.c on powerpc

2021-03-09 Thread Alexandre Oliva
ppc configurations that have -mstrict-align enabled by default fail gcc.dg/strlenopt-80.c, because some memcpy calls don't get turned into MEM_REFs, which defeats the tested-for strlen optimization. This was regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, tested with a cross to a ppc64-vxworks7r2 configured

enable sqrt insns for cdce3.c

2021-03-09 Thread Alexandre Oliva
The test expects shrink-wrapping of the fsqrt call, but that will only occur when there is a usable sqrt insn. Arrange for dejagnu to add the options that enable the sqrt insn, if one is available, and to skip the test otherwise. H-P, this *should* obviate the mmix-specific dg-skip-if. Would

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Fix check_effective_target_sqrt_insn (PR99352)

2021-03-09 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Mar 9, 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > +return [check_no_compiler_messages powerpc_sqrt object { I don't think you really need to assemble this. s/object/assembly/ would do. Even preprocessing alone would do, but I don't think check_compiler can do that. -- Alexandre Oliva, happy

Re: add -mpowerpc-gpopt to options for sqrt insn on PowerPC

2021-03-09 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Mar 9, 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:07:29PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Mar 3, 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> It's skipping the test, as the change you propose, that reduces testing >> surface, when testing only a configuration that ends up

[PATCH] skip testing time before epoch on mips

2021-03-09 Thread Chen Li
When execute libstdc++ testcases on mips, I notice that last_write_time alawys failed, and the failed VERIFY is "VERIFY( approx_equal(last_write_time(f.path), time) );" where testing time before than epoch. Below is the minimal case: ``` // gcc a.c int main() { struct timespec

[PATCH] c++: Fix error-recovery with requires expression [PR99500]

2021-03-09 Thread Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches
This fixes an ICE on invalid code where one of the parameters was error_mark_node and thus resetting its DECL_CONTEXT crashed. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? gcc/cp/ChangeLog: PR c++/99500 * parser.c (cp_parser_requirement_parameter_list): Handle

[PATCH] c++: Fix bogus warning in deprecated namespace [PR99318]

2021-03-09 Thread Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches
In GCC 10, I introduced cp_warn_deprecated_use_scopes so that we can handle attribute deprecated on a namespace declaration. This function walks the decl's contexts so that we warn for code like namespace [[deprecated]] N { struct S { }; } N::S s; We call cp_warn_deprecated_use_scopes when

Committed, cris: define DWARF_FRAME_REGISTERS

2021-03-09 Thread Hans-Peter Nilsson via Gcc-patches
When DWARF_FRAME_REGISTERS isn't defined, the default is FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER which means that if you add faked registers to the port, used for frame-context related elimination, room is allocated for them in the register context used for frame-unwinding, which is wasteful because they're

Re: [PATCH] c: don't drop typedef information in casts

2021-03-09 Thread David Lamparter
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 02:28:15AM +0100, David Lamparter wrote: > The TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT() here was, for casts to a typedef'd type name, > resulting in all information about the typedef's involvement getting > lost. This drops necessary information for warnings and can make them > confusing or

[PATCH] c: don't drop typedef information in casts

2021-03-09 Thread David Lamparter
The TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT() here was, for casts to a typedef'd type name, resulting in all information about the typedef's involvement getting lost. This drops necessary information for warnings and can make them confusing or even misleading. It also makes specialized warnings for unspecified-size

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: All LRA target selector

2021-03-09 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/9/21 2:27 PM, Dave Anglin wrote: > Okay? > > Add LRA target selector. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > PR testsuite/99292 > * lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_lra): New. > * gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c: Use LRA target selector. > *

[committed] IRA: Process digital constraints containing more one digit

2021-03-09 Thread Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
While working on PR99454 I found that IR incorrectly processes constraints starting with '0'..'9' and containing more one digit. It is probably a rare event and it does not result in wrong code generation.  Simply, the generated code will be more efficient. In any case the following patch

[PATCH] avoid assuming gimple_call_alloc_size argument is a call (PR 99489)

2021-03-09 Thread Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches
The gimple_call_alloc_size() function is documented to "return null when STMT is not a call to a valid allocation function" but the code assumes STMT is a call statement, causing the function to ICE when it isn't. The attached patch changes the function to fulfill its contract and return null

[PATCH] testsuite: All LRA target selector

2021-03-09 Thread Dave Anglin
Okay? Add LRA target selector. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR testsuite/99292 * lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_lra): New. * gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-2.c: Use LRA target selector. * gcc.c-torture/compile/asmgoto-5.c: Likewise. *

[PATCH v2] Ada: hashed container Cursor type predefined equality non-conformance

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Wai
Thanks for the pointer! I think Eric was a little bit too generous last time and formatted the commit log for me =P. I have added the appropriate entries to the Changelog's, and have included those in the patch (attached), which is also updated to master/HEAD, hopefully that is the most helpful

Re: [PATCH] ssa-ifcombine: combining comparisons [Bug 53806]

2021-03-09 Thread Ivan Sučić via Gcc-patches
Richard Biener wrote: >I don't think removing all code is OK since it would >allow combining x == y || x > y to x >= y which may >trap. The bugreport suggests to alter the last >test to something like > > if (trap && !ltrap && !rtrap) > return NULL_TREE; > >thus if we manage to remove a trap

[PATCH] PR fortran/99205 - [10/11 Regression] Out of memory with undefined character length

2021-03-09 Thread Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches
Dear all, character variables with undefined length are not allowed as objects in DATA statements. We better reject them. Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for master / backport? Thanks, Harald PR fortran/99205 - Out of memory with undefined character length A variable that is a data

Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] Add new function lang_GNU_GIMPLE

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 12:17 PM Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > I think I've already said this at some point but you shouldn't need > this. There's no > "GIMPLE language", the user wrote C or C++ or Fortran or ... Ok we will drop this patch from the series.

Re: [PATCH 2/3 V2] Do not include stdio.h in libgcc's Decimal/Float128 conversions.

2021-03-09 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi! On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 02:12:56PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 03:53:06PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > If you want to make decimal and/or QP float work only on 64-bit LE Linux > > you should say so. And in that case, that is certainly not acceptable > >

Re: [PATCH] phiopt: Fix up conditional_replacement [PR99305]

2021-03-09 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/9/21 8:40 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > Hi! > > Before my PR97690 changes, conditional_replacement would not set neg > when the nonzero arg was boolean true. > I've simplified the testing, so that it first finds the zero argument > and then checks the other argument for all

Re: add -mpowerpc-gpopt to options for sqrt insn on PowerPC

2021-03-09 Thread Segher Boessenkool
Hi! On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:07:29PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Mar 3, 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > It's skipping the test, as the change you propose, that reduces testing > surface, when testing only a configuration that ends up skipping it. Not at all. There are very many

Re: [PATCH] phiopt: Fix up conditional_replacement [PR99305]

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener
On March 9, 2021 4:40:22 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >Hi! > >Before my PR97690 changes, conditional_replacement would not set neg >when the nonzero arg was boolean true. >I've simplified the testing, so that it first finds the zero argument >and then checks the other argument for all the

[COMMITTED] arm: fix bootstrap failure following automatic mode selection patch

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Earnshaw (lists) via Gcc-patches
Fix a signed vs unsigned comparison in last change. gcc: * common/config/arm/arm-common.c (arm_config_default): Change type of 'i' to unsigned. --- gcc/common/config/arm/arm-common.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

[PATCH] rs6000: Fix check_effective_target_sqrt_insn (PR99352)

2021-03-09 Thread Segher Boessenkool
The previous version returned true for all PowerPC. This is incorrect. We only support floating point square root instructions if a) we support floating point instructions at all, and b) we have _ARCH_PPCSQ defined. 2020-03-09 Segher Boessenkool * testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Fix up attr-flatten-1.c failure [PR99363]

2021-03-09 Thread Eric Botcazou
> We should still test that we get the warning if the target doesn't have > the attribute. I'll fix the test, thanks. You probably need to do the same on the 10 branch since it fails there too. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: [committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
Here is the patch taking all the proposals into account. Successfully bootstrapped on x86-64. commit 7ad6b73421e3599628bf52fb175f004ce13f2ae9 (HEAD -> master) Author: Vladimir N. Makarov Date: Tue Mar 9 10:57:21 2021 -0500 [PR99454] LRA: Process separately 'g' and digital constraints >

Re: [PATCH v2] fix Ada bootstrap on Cygwin64 (PR bootstrap/94918)

2021-03-09 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/8/21 3:21 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> This one worked. Is that what you had in mind? >> >> * raise-gcc.c: On Cygwin include mingw32.h to prevent >> windows.h from including x86intrin.h or emmintrin.h. > Yep, exactly, thanks, you may put it on whichever branch you need. I've

Re: [PATCH] Ada: hashed container Cursor type predefined equality non-conformance

2021-03-09 Thread Arnaud Charlet
> Oops, I wrote "effected" when I meant "affected". Of course, despite reading > it several times before sending, I only noticed it after sending. > > Edited version: > > --- > > * libgnat/a-cohase.ads, libgnat/a-cohase.adb, libgnat/a-cohama.ads, > libgnat/a-cohama.adb, libgnat/a-cihama.ads,

[PATCH v2] aarch64: Fix SVE ACLE builtins with LTO [PR99216]

2021-03-09 Thread Alex Coplan via Gcc-patches
Hi all, Here is a v2 patch which provides a more obviously fake answer to TARGET_BUILTIN_DECL: this can hopefully go in for GCC 11. For GCC 12, it seems that we should consider removing the target hook. Original patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-March/566405.html --- As

[PATCH] phiopt: Fix up conditional_replacement [PR99305]

2021-03-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! Before my PR97690 changes, conditional_replacement would not set neg when the nonzero arg was boolean true. I've simplified the testing, so that it first finds the zero argument and then checks the other argument for all the handled cases (1, -1 and 1 << X, where the last case is what the

Re: [PATCH] arc: Remove orphan function.

2021-03-09 Thread Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
On 3/9/21 3:53 AM, Claudiu Zissulescu via Gcc-patches wrote: > Remove unused function. > > gcc/ > 2021-03-09 Claudiu Zissulescu > > * config/arc/arc.c (arc_attr_type): Remove function. OK jeff

RE: [PATCH] Ada: hashed container Cursor type predefined equality non-conformance

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Wai
Oops, I wrote "effected" when I meant "affected". Of course, despite reading it several times before sending, I only noticed it after sending. Edited version: --- * libgnat/a-cohase.ads, libgnat/a-cohase.adb, libgnat/a-cohama.ads, libgnat/a-cohama.adb, libgnat/a-cihama.ads,

Re: [PATCH] c++, v2: Fix coroutines on targetm.cxx.cdtor_return_this targets [PR99459]

2021-03-09 Thread Nathan Sidwell
On 3/9/21 10:23 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 08:01:26AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote: thanks for digging into this. Looks good, but could you take the opportunity to rewrite the conditionals to a single if (dummy) { ... do the non-null things ... } ? So like this?

RE: [PATCH] Ada: hashed container Cursor type predefined equality non-conformance

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Wai
Hey Arno, I forgot that last time as well! How about this: --- * libgnat/a-cohase.ads, libgnat/a-cohase.adb, libgnat/a-cohama.ads, libgnat/a-cohama.adb, libgnat/a-cihama.ads, libgnat/a-cihama.adb: Ensure that Cursor objects always have their "Position" component set to ensure predefined

[PATCH] c++: Only reject reinterpret casts from pointers to integers for manifestly_const_eval evaluation [PR99456]

2021-03-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! My PR82304/PR95307 fix moved reinterpret cast from pointer to integer diagnostics from cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr where it caught invalid code only at the outermost level down into cxx_eval_constant_expression. Unfortunately, it regressed following testcase, we emit worse code including

Re: [committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
On 2021-03-09 9:53 a.m., Martin Liška wrote: On 3/9/21 3:12 PM, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches wrote: The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, ppc64le, and arm64.  Unfortunately, I did not manage to reduce the test (whose size is 5MB). I've just reduced test-case

[PATCH] c++, v2: Fix coroutines on targetm.cxx.cdtor_return_this targets [PR99459]

2021-03-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 08:01:26AM -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > thanks for digging into this. Looks good, but could you take the > opportunity to rewrite the conditionals to a single > > if (dummy) { ... do the non-null things ... } > > ? So like this? Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux

[testsuite] Assorted fixes

2021-03-09 Thread Eric Botcazou
First, gcc.dg/array-quals-1.c does not pass if the compiler is configured with --enable-default-pie because the section names change, so force -fno-pie. Second, replace *-*-solaris* with sparc*-*-* for gfortran.dg/pr95690.f90 because this depends on the architecture rather than the OS. Third

[COMMITED]: rx.h: Define supported debugging types.

2021-03-09 Thread Nick Clifton via Gcc-patches
Hi Guys, I am applying the patch below to fix a problem building the rx port. The rx.h header file defines PREFERRED_DEBUGGING_TYPE but it was not defining the types of debugging it preferred. This results in the definition in defaults.h being triggered and the compiler complaining

Re: [committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Martin Liška
On 3/9/21 3:12 PM, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches wrote: The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, ppc64le, and arm64.  Unfortunately, I did not manage to reduce the test (whose size is 5MB). I've just reduced test-case from it: $ cat a.c struct skb_shared_info {

Re: [committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
On 2021-03-09 9:26 a.m., Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:12:36AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches wrote: diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c index 76e3ff7efe6..feff766c590 100644 --- a/gcc/lra-constraints.c +++ b/gcc/lra-constraints.c @@ -3452,6

Re: [committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 03:26:12PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote: > On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:12:36AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c > > index 76e3ff7efe6..feff766c590 100644 > > ---

Re: [committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:12:36AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches wrote: > diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c > index 76e3ff7efe6..feff766c590 100644 > --- a/gcc/lra-constraints.c > +++ b/gcc/lra-constraints.c > @@ -3452,6 +3452,10 @@ process_address_1 (int nop,

[committed] [PR99454] LRA: Process 0..9 constraints in process_address_1

2021-03-09 Thread Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
The following patch solves https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99454 The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, ppc64le, and arm64.  Unfortunately, I did not manage to reduce the test (whose size is 5MB). commit 9725df0233b6fb6e761875968b3b8e9fd9f522ac (HEAD ->

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Andreas Schwab
On Mär 09 2021, Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote: > remote: error: hook declined to update refs/heads/users/jemarch/ctf-v4 User branches are located under refs/users. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA

[Committed] IBM Z: arch14 fix option string used for Binutils

2021-03-09 Thread Andreas Krebbel via Gcc-patches
gcc/ChangeLog: * config/s390/s390.c (struct s390_processor processor_table): Binutils name string must not be empty. --- gcc/config/s390/s390.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/gcc/config/s390/s390.c b/gcc/config/s390/s390.c index

[committed] testsuite: Fix up pr98920.c on non-glibc or old glibc targets [PR98920]

2021-03-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! Not all OSes have regex.h and not all OSes that do have REG_STARTEND macro support. Conditionalize the test on that. Tested on x86_64-linux without/with Martin's libsanitizer fix, committed to trunk as obvious. 2021-03-09 Jakub Jelinek PR sanitizer/98920 *

c++: Clarify note about -fmodules-ts [PR 99472]

2021-03-09 Thread Nathan Sidwell
This clarifies that c++2[03] intentionally does not enable c++20 modules. PR c++/99472 gcc/cp/ parser.c (cp_parser_diagnose_invalid_type_name): Clarify that C++20 does not yet imply modules. -- Nathan Sidwell diff --git c/gcc/cp/parser.c w/gcc/cp/parser.c index

Re: [PATCH] c++: Fix coroutines on targetm.cxx.cdtor_return_this targets [PR99459]

2021-03-09 Thread Nathan Sidwell
On 3/9/21 4:51 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: Hi! The r11-7528 build_co_await changes broke coroutines on arm*-linux-gnuabi, 2780 ^FAIL.*coroutines/ in total. The problem is that arm is targetm.cxx.cdtor_return_this target where both ctors and dtors in the ABI return this pointer rather than void,

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 11:46 AM Jose E. Marchesi > wrote: >> >> >> >> It probably should define BTF_DEBUGGING_INFO and that should >> >> enable parts guarded with DWARF2_DEBUGGING_INFO as well. >> > >> > BTW, is there a git branch one can more easily browse the new code? >> >> I can push the

Re: [patch] Fix PR C++/90448

2021-03-09 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 6:19 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this is a regression present on the mainline and 10 branch for architectures > > that pass all structure types by reference, e.g. 32-bit PowerPC or SPARC. > > > > Jakub posted a detailed analysis in the audit trail and this

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 12:29 PM Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > > > Hi Richard. > Thanks for looking at this :) > > [Today I sent a V4 of the series containing a couple of fixes to the BTF > code. It doesn't contain big changes so the discussion below still > applies.] > > >> In turn,

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
Hi Richard. Thanks for looking at this :) [Today I sent a V4 of the series containing a couple of fixes to the BTF code. It doesn't contain big changes so the discussion below still applies.] >> In turn, debug_format_do_cu traverses the tree of DIEs passed to it calling >> ctf_do_die on

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 11:46 AM Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > > > >> It probably should define BTF_DEBUGGING_INFO and that should > >> enable parts guarded with DWARF2_DEBUGGING_INFO as well. > > > > BTW, is there a git branch one can more easily browse the new code? > > I can push the branch to

[PATCH] arc: Remove orphan function.

2021-03-09 Thread Claudiu Zissulescu via Gcc-patches
Remove unused function. gcc/ 2021-03-09 Claudiu Zissulescu * config/arc/arc.c (arc_attr_type): Remove function. Signed-off-by: Claudiu Zissulescu --- gcc/config/arc/arc.c | 17 - 1 file changed, 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/config/arc/arc.c

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
>> It probably should define BTF_DEBUGGING_INFO and that should >> enable parts guarded with DWARF2_DEBUGGING_INFO as well. > > BTW, is there a git branch one can more easily browse the new code? I can push the branch to users/jemarch/ctf-v4 if thats ok?

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 11:15 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 12:18 PM Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > [Changes from V2: > > - Rebased to latest master. > > - Several bug fixes in the CTF support. > > - Several bug fixes in the BTF support. > > - New tests

Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] Add new function lang_GNU_GIMPLE

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 12:17 PM Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote: I think I've already said this at some point but you shouldn't need this. There's no "GIMPLE language", the user wrote C or C++ or Fortran or ... > 2021-02-18 Indu Bhagat > > * langhooks.c (lang_GNU_GIMPLE): New

Re: [PATCH V3 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 12:18 PM Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches wrote: > > [Changes from V2: > - Rebased to latest master. > - Several bug fixes in the CTF support. > - Several bug fixes in the BTF support. > - New tests for BTF. > - Fix a couple of tests in the CTF testsuite. > - More testing:

[PATCH V4 3/5] CTF/BTF testsuites

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
This commit adds a new testsuite for the CTF debug format. 2021-02-18 Indu Bhagat David Faust gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-1.c: New test. * gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-2.c: Likewise. * gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-anonymous-struct-1.c: Likewise. *

[PATCH V4 5/5] Enable BTF generation in the BPF backend

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
This patch changes the BPF GCC backend in order to use the DWARF debug hooks and therefore enables the user to generate BTF debugging information with -gbtf. Generating BTF is crucial when compiling BPF programs, since the CO-RE (compile-once, run-everwhere) mechanism used by the kernel BPF

[PATCH V4 4/5] CTF/BTF documentation

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
This commit documents the new command line options introduced by the CTF and BTF debug formats. 2021-02-18 Indu Bhagat * doc/invoke.texi: Document the CTF and BTF debug info options. --- gcc/doc/invoke.texi | 20 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+) diff --git

[PATCH V4 0/5] Support for the CTF and BTF debug formats

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
[Changes from V3: - Rebased to latest master. - Several bug fixes in the BTF support. - More testing: 860 Gentoo packages built with -gctf activated by default.] Hi people! Last year we submitted a first patch series introducing support for the CTF debugging format in GCC [1]. We got a lot of

[PATCH V4 1/5] Add new function lang_GNU_GIMPLE

2021-03-09 Thread Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
2021-02-18 Indu Bhagat * langhooks.c (lang_GNU_GIMPLE): New Function. * langhooks.h: New Prototype. --- gcc/langhooks.c | 9 + gcc/langhooks.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+) diff --git a/gcc/langhooks.c b/gcc/langhooks.c index 2354386f7b4..0082ee9f350 100644

[PATCH] c++: Fix coroutines on targetm.cxx.cdtor_return_this targets [PR99459]

2021-03-09 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! The r11-7528 build_co_await changes broke coroutines on arm*-linux-gnuabi, 2780 ^FAIL.*coroutines/ in total. The problem is that arm is targetm.cxx.cdtor_return_this target where both ctors and dtors in the ABI return this pointer rather than void, and build_new_method_call_1 does:

Re: [patch] Fix PR C++/90448

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 10:18 AM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > The whole point of thunks is that they do not require things like copying > > ... is this case somehow IPA-SRA/CPed in an odd way? Otherwise it seems > > like the passed through reference was mishandled on the GIMPLE level? > > Maybe,

Re: [patch] Fix PR C++/90448

2021-03-09 Thread Eric Botcazou
> The whole point of thunks is that they do not require things like copying > ... is this case somehow IPA-SRA/CPed in an odd way? Otherwise it seems > like the passed through reference was mishandled on the GIMPLE level? Maybe, but the change looks correct on its own and nobody has cared about

Re: [patch] Fix PR C++/90448

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 6:19 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Hi, > > this is a regression present on the mainline and 10 branch for architectures > that pass all structure types by reference, e.g. 32-bit PowerPC or SPARC. > > Jakub posted a detailed analysis in the audit trail and this boils down to >

Re: [PATCH] aarch64: Fix SVE ACLE builtins with LTO [PR99216]

2021-03-09 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 4:46 PM Alex Coplan wrote: > > On 08/03/2021 16:21, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 4:14 PM Alex Coplan wrote: > > > > > > On 08/03/2021 14:57, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 12:44 PM Alex Coplan via Gcc-patches > > > > wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH] Ada: hashed container Cursor type predefined equality non-conformance

2021-03-09 Thread Arnaud Charlet
Richard, Your patch is missing a corresponding commit log. Can you please add it to your submission? Otherwise your test and patch look good so far, thanks! Arno > We discovered an issue with the GNAT implementation of the hashed container > types.