Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:41:51AM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: > > Just a couple of small typos: > "Unexpected expr_type cause an ICE" ; causes? > "! An array of derived types workd too." ; works? > > Apart from that it's OK for trunk. > > Thanks for the patch > Thanks for the the

Re: ICF fixes

> > this patchs fixes few issues in ipa-icf. First I drop the use of > > TYPE_CANONICAL because that is no longer part of type compatibility > > machinery. > > That doesn't seem right, as the check on TYPE_CANONICAL was restored for > aggregate types because of the serious issues we found. > >

Fix lto-symtab ICE during Ada LTO bootstrap

Hi, this patch fixes an ICE seen with Ada LTO bootstrap in reporting type mismatches and it also makes us to stop complaining about C++ ODR violation. The warnings are however correct. I looked at few: ../../libiberty/xstrerror.c:40:14: warning: type of �strerror� does not match original

[ptx] fix CLZ

This patch fixes CLZ. It always returns SImode, we should look at the input operand to determine the type. Fixes cc.c-torture/execute/builtin-bitops-1.c committed. nathan 2015-11-21 Nathan Sidwell * config/nvptx/nvptx.md (clz2): Use operand 1 for type. Index:

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:07:35AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:41:51AM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: > >> > >> Just a couple of small typos: > >> "Unexpected expr_type cause an

Re: RFA: PATCH to match.pd for c++/68385

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Richard Biener wrote: On November 20, 2015 8:58:15 PM GMT+01:00, Jason Merrill wrote: In this bug, we hit the (A & sign-bit) != 0 -> A < 0 transformation. Because of delayed folding, the operands aren't fully folded yet, so we have NOP_EXPRs around

[ptx] Add more whitespace

In investigating some failures, I noticed the PTX output is rather dense. Committed this to add some blank lines before DECL and DEF lines. Also fixed a few formatting inconsistencies I noticed on the way. nathan 2015-11-21 Nathan Sidwell * config/nvptx/nvptx.c

Re: [PATCH, rs6000, gcc 5 backport] Fix PR target/67808, LRA ICE on double to long double conversion

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 02:04:48PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: >> PR67808 exposes a problem with the constraints in the *extenddftf2_internal >> pattern, in that it allows TFmode operands to occupy Altivec

Re: More Division optimization using match and simplify

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Hurugalawadi, Naveen wrote: Please find attached the patch that moves some more division optimizations from fold-const using match and simplify. First, note that we are in stage 3, so this all may have to wait until sometime around March or April next year unless it is

Re: [wwwdocs] Update C++ conformance status

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > I forgot to respond to this, and never committed the patch, sorry. > > I've committed the changes to htdocs/projects/cxx0x.html now, but > not the htdocs/bugs/index.html change. I wasn't opposed to the bugs/index.html change, mind. Only wondering

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:41:51AM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: >> >> Just a couple of small typos: >> "Unexpected expr_type cause an ICE" ; causes? >> "! An array of derived types workd too." ; works?

Fix atomic test

I've committed this to fix gcc.dg/atomic-generic.c. It was calling memcmp without a declaration in scope, and passing a plain int as the 3rd argument instead of directly using sizeof or casting to size_t. This blew up PTX with a type mismatch. nathan 2015-11-21 Nathan Sidwell

[PATCH] Mark by_ref mem_ref in build_receiver_ref as non-trapping

[ was: Re: [Committed] Mark *.omp_data_i as non-trapping ] On 13/07/15 11:49, Tom de Vries wrote: [ was: Re: [gomp4, committed] Handle nested loops in kernels regions ] On 13/07/15 10:36, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:19:56AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: We rely on

Re: [PATCH] Fix uninitialized src_range within c_expr (Re: libcpp/C FE source range patch committed (r230331))

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:12 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 16:24 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> On 11/17/2015 04:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 22:34 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> >> >> >> Should c_expr perhaps acquire a constructor

Re: [PATCH] lround for PowerPC

On November 22, 2015 2:52:53 AM GMT+01:00, David Edelsohn wrote: >PowerPC was missing a definition of the lroundMN pattern, which can be >implemented with VSX instructions available in Power7. Below is a >first draft. > >- David > >* config/rs6000/rs6000.md (*xsrdpidf2): New

[PATCH] lround for PowerPC

PowerPC was missing a definition of the lroundMN pattern, which can be implemented with VSX instructions available in Power7. Below is a first draft. - David * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (*xsrdpidf2): New define_insn. (lrounddfdi2): New define_expand. diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:19:22AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:07:35AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Steve Kargl > >>

Re: [PATCH] Fix uninitialized src_range within c_expr (Re: libcpp/C FE source range patch committed (r230331))

On Sat, 2015-11-21 at 13:54 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:12 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 16:24 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > >> On 11/17/2015 04:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > >> > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 22:34 +0100, Bernd

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

‘dm’ is actually not used, the building problem is fixed by the patch (I did not rearrange the nested ‘if’s) --- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/simplify.c2015-11-21 20:59:57.0 +0100 +++ gcc/fortran/simplify.c 2015-11-21 21:06:30.0 +0100 @@ -1792,7 +1792,6 @@ gfc_expr *

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 09:22:40PM +0100, Dominique d'Humi??res wrote: > ???dm??? is actually not used, the building problem is fixed by the patch (I > did not rearrange the nested ???if???s) > > --- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/simplify.c 2015-11-21 20:59:57.0 +0100 > +++

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:07:35AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Steve Kargl >> wrote: >> > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:41:51AM +0100, Paul

[PATCH] c++/42121 - diagnose invalid flexible array members

Bug 42121 - g++ should warn or error on internal 0 size array in struct, is a request to diagnose declarations of flexible array members that aren't last in the enclosing struct, such as in the following: struct S { int a; char b[]; // invalid int c; }; The

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

> + * simplify.c (gfc_simplify_cshift): Work around bootstrap issues > + due to inappropriate warning options. The warning options are appropriate, any dead code can potentially hide a bug and should be flagged; every static analyzer will also do it and we would soon have PRs opened

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:26:17PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > + * simplify.c (gfc_simplify_cshift): Work around bootstrap issues > > + due to inappropriate warning options. > > The warning options are appropriate, any dead code can potentially hide a bug > and should be flagged; every

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

> > > > > > Perhaps, bootstrap needs to set appropriate warning levels. > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2015-11/msg00648.html > > > > See 5 lines up. > Committed. Index: ChangeLog === --- ChangeLog (revision

Re: [PATCH] Fix uninitialized src_range within c_expr (Re: libcpp/C FE source range patch committed (r230331))

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 3:00 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > On Sat, 2015-11-21 at 13:54 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:12 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> > On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 16:24 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> >> On 11/17/2015

Re: [PATCH] GCC system.h and Graphite header order

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:03 PM, David Edelsohn wrote: > Graphite relies on the ISL library and includes multiple ISL headers. > The ISL headers refer to identifiers that are poisoned for use in GCC. > The source files for Graphite were organized to include the ISL > headers

[PATCH] GCC system.h and Graphite header order

Graphite relies on the ISL library and includes multiple ISL headers. The ISL headers refer to identifiers that are poisoned for use in GCC. The source files for Graphite were organized to include the ISL headers first, to avoid the identifier poisoning, which breaks some platforms because GCC

Re: [PATCH, 4/16] Implement -foffload-alias

On 13/11/15 12:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:29:51PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: thanks for the explanation. Filed as PR68331 - '[meta-bug] fipa-pta issues'. Any feedback on the '#pragma GCC offload-alias=' bit above? Is that sort of what you had in

Re: [PATCH, 10/16] Add pass_oacc_kernels pass group in passes.def

On 20/11/15 11:28, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, 19 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote: >On 17/11/15 15:53, Tom de Vries wrote: > > >And the above LIM example > > >is none for why you need two LIM passes... > > > >Indeed. I'm planning a separate reply to explain in more detail the need > >for the

Re: [PATCH] g++.dg/init/vbase1.C and g++.dg/cpp/ucn-1.C

> I fixed this with the below patch. Tested on x86_64 linux, x86_64 darwin and > my port. If you want to > list aarch64/arn and mips, please do. > > * g++.dg/init/vbase1.C: Only run on x86_64-*-* as this testcase > isn't portable. I have added i?86-*-* to the list. 2015-11-21 Uros Bizjak

Re: [wwwdocs] Update C++ conformance status

On 06/10/15 12:39 -0400, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, Jonathan Wakely wrote: People are being scared off by the experimental status on https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00025.html This makes it clear C++11 in 5.1 is no longer

Re: [PATCH/RFC] C++ FE: expression ranges (v2)

On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 02:16:49AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 11/19/2015 03:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > >On 11/15/2015 12:01 AM, David Malcolm wrote: > >>As with the C frontend, there's an issue with tree nodes that > >>don't have locations: VAR_DECL, INTEGER_CST, etc: > >> > >> int test

New Chinese (simplified) PO file for 'gcc' (version 5.2.0)

Hello, gentle maintainer. This is a message from the Translation Project robot. A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted by the Chinese (simplified) team of translators. The file is available at: http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/zh_CN.po (This file,

Re: ICF fixes

> this patchs fixes few issues in ipa-icf. First I drop the use of > TYPE_CANONICAL because that is no longer part of type compatibility > machinery. That doesn't seem right, as the check on TYPE_CANONICAL was restored for aggregate types because of the serious issues we found. > Second I also

Re: [PATCH] (Partial) Implementation of simplificaiton of CSHIFT

Hi Steve, Just a couple of small typos: "Unexpected expr_type cause an ICE" ; causes? "! An array of derived types workd too." ; works? Apart from that it's OK for trunk. Thanks for the patch Cheers Paul On 20 November 2015 at 21:09, Steve Kargl wrote: >

Re: C++11 support still experimental?

On 21 November 2015 at 10:35, Uros Bizjak wrote: > [1] still says in its third paragraph: > > --q-- > Important: GCC's support for C++11 is still experimental. Some > features were implemented based on early proposals, and no attempt > will be made to maintain backward compatibility when they are