On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Cary Coutant wrote:
[resending in plain text. Sorry, gmail defaulted to HTML.]
Ping. I'm not looking for commit approval yet, just advice on how
thorough we need to be to support -g and LTO together.
(What's the right way to send a patch to fix a PR? I'm not even sure
Hi Sebastien, Hi Steven
I am applying the patch below as obvious fix for a typo in lm32.c.
Cheers
Nick
gcc/ChangeLog
2012-06-29 Nick Clifton ni...@redhat.com
* config/lm32/lm32.c (lm32_compute_frame_size): Fix typo.
Index: lm32.c
Hi DJ,
The delete_insn() function no longer returns the insn after the one
that has been deleted, so gcc/config/mep/mep.c:mep_reorg_regmove() no
longer compiles. The patch below is a simple fix for the problem, but
I was not sure whether it would be better to use
Hi Jeff, Hi Alex,
I recently encountered a problem with the REG_SAVE_BYTES macro in the
mn10300 backend. When compiling some code in -fPID mode it was
producing a different result to the mask computed by
mn10300_get_live_callee_saved_regs. The problem turned out to be that
the macro
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 11:00:14AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
Indeed - the lack of cross-sub-128bit-word operations makes it very much
expensive for some vectorizations. Initially we added the patterns for
vectorization of the hi/lo and interleave stuff because we didn't want
regressions
Hi,
This backports the off-by-one fix for vrev to the ARM port as
mentioned in my post earlier here. Since I've heard no objections from
the release branch maintainers or anyone else , and given I've not
seen any fallout from the auto-testers I'm backporting this to the FSF
4.7 branch.
Hi,
Taking Richi's statement here
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg01399.html as an approval
- I've backported the comment character fix for gnu_unique_object on
ARM to the FSF 4.7 branch.
regards,
Ramana
2012-06-29 Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org
*
Next problem: libiberty. This looks reasonably well in dvi and pdf.
OK? That should really be the last error.
Andreas.
* copying-lib.texi (Library Copying): Don't use @heading inside
@enumerate.
diff --git a/libiberty/copying-lib.texi b/libiberty/copying-lib.texi
index
Hi
So the following is updated patch. Tested on qemu with arm/thumb modes
without regression.
thanks
Carrot
2012-06-29 Wei Guozhi car...@google.com
PR target/53447
* gcc.target/arm/pr53447-1.c: New testcase.
* gcc.target/arm/pr53447-2.c: New testcase.
2012-06-29
Tejas Belagod wrote:
Therefore strict_memory_address_addr_space_P () thinks that
(mem:OI (reg sp)) is a valid target address and lets it pass as
a subreg and does not narrow the subreg into a narrower memref.
find_reloads_toplev () should have infact given
strict_memory_address_addr_space_P
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson h...@axis.com
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:24:01 +0200
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson h...@axis.com
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200
A ping.
And another ping, now CCing ARM maintainers,
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg00983.html.
Y is 28 for
Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2012-06-29 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/52589
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp70.c: New testcase.
Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp70.c
Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Tejas Belagod wrote:
Therefore strict_memory_address_addr_space_P () thinks that
(mem:OI (reg sp)) is a valid target address and lets it pass as
a subreg and does not narrow the subreg into a narrower memref.
find_reloads_toplev () should have infact given
Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2012-06-29 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/37541
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr37508.c: Adjust and un-XFAIL.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/pr37508.c
On 29 June 2012 12:23, Carrot Wei car...@google.com wrote:
Hi
So the following is updated patch. Tested on qemu with arm/thumb modes
Assuming this testing was with and without neon ? Because the patterns
changed are different whether you use Neon or not.
without regression.
Can you add some
Hi,
PR 38474 testcase revealed what we can do a lot of entirely
unnecessary vdef walking only to throw away the result later because
of a much cheaper check. This patch fixes that.
The patch applies to both trunk and the 4.7 branch, I have
bootstrapped and tested it on both on an x86_64-linux
Hi,
PR 38474 testcase revealed what we can do a lot of entirely
unnecessary vdef walking only to throw away the result later because
of a much cheaper check. I have posted a patch for trunk and 4.7 just
a moment ago. this is a version for 4.6, doing essentially the same
thing.
I am about to
Tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2012-06-29 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/47061
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp71.c: New testcase.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vrp71.c
Try CC:ing Gerald as the most likely maintainer to review this.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
+;; Split symbol_refs at the later stage (after cprop), instead of generating
+;; movt/movw pair directly at expand. Otherwise corresponding high_sum
+;; and lo_sum would be merged back into memory load at cprop. However,
I would rewrite part of your comment as
+;; movt/movw is preferable,
On 29 June 2012 14:48, Dmitry Melnik d...@ispras.ru wrote:
On 06/27/2012 07:55 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
I must admit that I had been suggesting to Zhenqiang about turning
this off by tightening the movsi_insn predicates rather than adding a
split, but given that it appears to produce
Hello,
This patch removes the CASE_USE_BIT_TESTS target macro. The default
value of the macro is defined in stmt.c, where the only user of the
macro is also. No target re-defines the macro.
(I wonder if the test is necessary at all. AFAICT all targets support
shifts in word_mode. The macro was
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This patch removes the CASE_USE_BIT_TESTS target macro. The default
value of the macro is defined in stmt.c, where the only user of the
macro is also. No target re-defines the macro.
(I wonder if the test
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
This patch removes the CASE_USE_BIT_TESTS target macro.
...
Ok. (poison CASE_USE_BIT_TESTS?)
Right, I've done that in
On 06/28/2012 08:02 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jun 28, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
No, there is no way to combine target and xfail,
Ah... Grrr I hate non-composability. Given that, I think the original
patch is fine, subject of course to the wants and wishes of vect people.
We use it everywhere else, but it got forgotten here. Saves two shuffles on
Altivec.
Although with all of this duplication it makes me wonder if we shouldn't just
give up
on the idea of auto-generating MULT_HIGHPART from other operations
(particularly given
the extra type frobbing involved).
The following patch fixes IA64 bootstrap after the last merge.
The patch was sucessfully bootstrapped on ia64 and x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 189079.
2012-06-29 Vladimir Makarov vmaka...@redhat.com
* lra-constraints.c (get_op_class): Don't process SUBREG.
(What's the right way to send a patch to fix a PR? I'm not even sure
whether you were cc'ed on my response.)
The right way to send a patch to fix a PR is to send it to gcc-patches ;)
Well, yeah, but in this case I was just proposing a patch for
discussion, and using the bugzilla mechanism
On Jun 29, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Janis Johnson wrote:
Something like:
target { selector } xfail { selector }
where target is the first argument, xfail is the third.
Forcing (requiring) an ordering would be bad.
Selectors can be lists of target triplets, but those can be within
braces
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:10 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 06:35:19AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
This patch makes __WCHAR_TYPE__/wchar_t the same for gcc -m32 on
Linux/i386 and Linux/x86-64. OK
Resend, as I replied to a message that didn't have the usual suspects
on the cc line.
On 6/27/12, Lawrence Crowl cr...@google.com wrote:
..., does anyone object to removing the permission to use C++
streams?
Having heard no objection, I removed the permission.
The following patch is the
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Richard Henderson r...@redhat.com wrote:
We use it everywhere else, but it got forgotten here. Saves two shuffles on
Altivec.
Although with all of this duplication it makes me wonder if we shouldn't just
give up
on the idea of auto-generating MULT_HIGHPART
Hi!
The recent mksysinfo.sh change for glibc 2.16 bits/resource.h unfortunately
doesn't work, because the sed invocation two lines earlier removes the {}s
this sed command is looking for.
The following makes gcc 4.7 as well as trunk build in Fedora rawhide.
--- libgo/mksysinfo.sh 2012-06-29
On 06/29/2012 11:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
2012-05-31 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com
PR target/53539
* config/i386/gnu-user64.h (WCHAR_TYPE): Use int only for
TARGET_LP64.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/gnu-user64.h b/gcc/config/i386/gnu-user64.h
index 0e66d26..2941332
Enclosed is a patch that fixes indention and adds an already-approved
comment that I missed when porting the previous patch. I have checked
it in under the obvious rule.
Sterling
obvious.patch
Description: Binary data
It pertains to the source location assigned to the finally switch: the comment
in lower_try_finally_switch reads:
/* The location of the finally is either the last stmt in the finally
block or the location of the TRY_FINALLY itself. */
but the code reads:
finally_loc =
Hi!
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:44:24 +0100, Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
wrote:
2012-03-11 Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
gcc:
* config.gcc (enable_obsolete): Remove *-*-solaris2.8*.
(*-*-solaris2.[0-8], *-*-solaris2.[0-8].*): Mark unsupported.
37 matches
Mail list logo
