Then I think we can put all bits together now:
1. Let Sandra apply her Bit-fields patch reimplement
-fstrict-volatile-bitfields v4, part 1/2 which was
posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg02058.html
and approved here:
Hi,
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:18:23, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:18:23, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013
On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Richard,
I had
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
ignoring the
memory mode. I hope you are gonna like it.
This time
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem
Hmm, same patch as last time attached?
Richard.
Yes, only the change-log had one redundant line.
Bernd.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem
Richard,
Note I just want to help as well and I am not very familiar with
the details of the implementation here. So I'd rather have
a patch obviously correct to me - which expanding a condition
by several more checks isn't ;)
Thanks a lot, I understand that very well. Any help is welcome.
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
ignoring the
memory mode. I hope you are gonna like it.
This time I even added a comment :-)
Ok for trunk after boot-strap and regression-testing?
Bernd.
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:23:11, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
ignoring the
memory mode. I hope you are gonna like it.
This time I even added a comment :-)
Ehm, ...
+ /* If MODE
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
This is my proposal for ulimately getting rid of the nasty
store_fixed_bit_field recursion.
IMHO, the root of the recursion trouble is here:
@@ -1007,12 +1013,8 @@ store_fixed_bit_field (rtx op0, unsigned
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:23:11, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bernd Edlinger
bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de wrote:
Hi,
This is my proposal for ulimately getting rid of the nasty
store_fixed_bit_field recursion.
IMHO, the root of the recursion trouble is here:
@@
14 matches
Mail list logo
