[PATCH][PR lto/79061] Fix LTO plus ASAN fails with "AddressSanitizer: initialization-order-fiasco".

Hi, as was figured out in PR LTO + ASan raises false initialization order fiasco alarm due to in LTO case main_input_filename doesn't match module name passed to __asan_before_dynamic_init. Following Jakub's suggestion I used TRANSLATION_UNIT_DECL for corresponding globals to overcome this

Re: [PATCH] avoid calling memset et al. with excessively large sizes (PR 79095)

On 01/17/2017 08:16 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 01/17/2017 12:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:06:40PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: The test case submitted in bug 79095 - [7 regression] spurious stringop-overflow warning shows that GCC optimizes some loops into calls to

Re: [PATCH] Reload global options when strict aliasing is dropped (PR ipa/79043).

On 01/13/2017 02:01 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 01/13/2017 01:16 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Martin Liška wrote: As mentioned in the PR, we currently do not properly

Re: [PR C/79116] ICE with CilkPlus array notation and _Cilk_for (C front-end)

On 01/17/2017 09:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 09:22:52AM -0500, Aldy Hernandez wrote: This is the same as pr70565 but it fails in an entirely different manner in the C front-end. The problem here is that the parser builds an ARRAY_NOTATION_REF with a type of ptrdiff for

Re: [PATCH] avoid calling memset et al. with excessively large sizes (PR 79095)

On 01/17/2017 08:26 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/16/2017 05:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The test case submitted in bug 79095 - [7 regression] spurious stringop-overflow warning shows that GCC optimizes some loops into calls to memset with size arguments in excess of the object size limit. Since

RE: [PATCH] MIPS: Fix generation of DIV.G and MOD.G for Loongson targets.

> Maciej Rozycki writes: > > This ought to be handled then, likely by adding Loongson-specific RTL > > insns matching the `divmod4' and `udivmod4' expanders. It > > may be as simple as say (conceptually, untested): > > > > (define_insn "divmod4_loongson" > > [(set (match_operand:GPR 0

[PATCH] Fix wording of -Wmisleading-indentation (PR c++/71497)

Someone pointed out a grammar nit in the -Wmisleading-indentation diagnostic messages, which this patch fixes. Successfully bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and for gcc 6? gcc/c-family/ChangeLog: PR c++/71497 * c-indentation.c (warn_for_misleading_indentation):

patch to fix PR79058

The following patch fixes https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79058 The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64. Committed as rev. 244535. Index: ChangeLog === --- ChangeLog (revision 244534) +++

Re: [PATCH v3][AArch64] Fix symbol offset limit

Here is v3 of the patch - tree_fits_uhwi_p was necessary to ensure the size of a declaration is an integer. So the question is whether we should allow largish offsets outside of the bounds of symbols (v1), no offsets (this version), or small offsets (small negative and positive offsets just

Re: [PATCH] Fix wording of -Wmisleading-indentation (PR c++/71497)

On 01/17/2017 08:52 AM, David Malcolm wrote: Someone pointed out a grammar nit in the -Wmisleading-indentation diagnostic messages, which this patch fixes. Successfully bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for trunk and for gcc 6? gcc/c-family/ChangeLog: PR c++/71497 *

Re: [PATCH] Fix wrong assumption in contains_type_p (PR ipa/71207).

On 01/17/2017 11:43 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >> >> 2017-01-12 Martin Liska >> >> PR ipa/71207 >> * g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C: New test. >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> 2017-01-12 Martin Liska >> >> PR ipa/71207 >> *

Re: [PATCH] Speed-up use-after-scope (re-writing to SSA) (version 2)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 05:16:44PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > > If it did, we would ICE because ASAN_POISON_USE would survive this way until > > expansion. A quick fix for the ICE (if it can ever happen) would be easy, > > in sanopt remove ASAN_POISON_USE calls which have argument that is not

Re: [PATCH] Fix wrong assumption in contains_type_p (PR ipa/71207).

> > Ok, applied without the renaming as r244530. I guess you added that to cut > the recursion. > > Would it be fine to install the patch to active branches after proper testing? OK Honza > Thanks, > Martin > > >> bool consider_placement_new, > >> bool consider_bases) >

Re: [PATCH, GCC/LRA, gcc-5/6-branch] Fix PR78617: Fix conflict detection in rematerialization

On 01/16/2017 08:26 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/13/2017 11:19 AM, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: Ping? I'm not sure if an ok from Valdimir is enough or if I also need RM approval. Vlad's approval is all you need. Is that a general rule? I'm never too certain on that. Bernd

[PATCH] PR79114 use decayed type in std::throw_with_nested assertion

I added a static assertion to enforce the CopyConstructible requirement that the standard imposes for std::throw_with_nested. Unfortunately the standard is defective, so we started rejecting perfectly good code. This alters the check to what I think the standard should say (and what I've proposed

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to Go1.8rc1

I think this is missing the update of the libgo version number. - Lynn On 01/13/2017 06:05 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: I committed a patch to libgo to update the library to the first release candidate of the upcoming Go 1.8 release. This is a big update, mostly a straight copy of the code in

[PATCH] PR69699 document why __GLIBCXX__ macro is useless

The closest thing we have to a version macro in libstdc++ is __GLIBCXX__ which holds the valid of gcc/DATESTAMP from the source tree. That's useless for version checking or feature testing because snapshots have arbitrary values and there's no total order across branches (a later date does not

Re: [PATCH, bugfix] builtin expansion of strcmp for rs6000

On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 08:30 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote: > On 1/16/17 3:09 PM, Aaron Sawdey wrote: > > Here is an updated version of this patch. > > > > Tulio noted that glibc's strncmp test was failing. This turned out > > to > > be the use of signed HOST_WIDE_INT for handling strncmp length. The

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to Go1.8rc1

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:03:25AM -0600, Lynn A. Boger wrote: > I think this is missing the update of the libgo version number. Why? GCC 6.x shipped with libgo.so.9, so I don't see anything wrong on 7.x shipping libgo.so.10. Jakub

Re: [PATCH] adding missing LTO to some warning options (PR 78606)

On 01/17/2017 05:04 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Martin, On 10/01/17 22:16, Martin Sebor wrote: The -Walloca-larger-than, -Wformat-length, and -Wformat-truncation options do not mention LTO among the supported languages and so are disabled when -flto is used, causing false negatives. The

Re: [C++ PATCH] c++/61636 generic lambdas and this capture

On 01/13/2017 08:33 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: * lambda.c (resolvable_dummy): New, broken out of ... Maybe resolvable_dummy_lambda, since that's what it returns? OK with that change. Jason

Re: [PATCH] Emit DW_AT_data_bit_offset instead of DW_AT_{data_member_location,bit_offset,byte_size} for -gdwarf-5 (PR debug/71669)

OK. On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > While DW_AT_data_bit_offset has been introduced already in DWARF4, GDB only > gained support for it last November, so I think it is better to enable this > only for -gdwarf-5 for now and we can reconsider it in

Re: [PATCH 9c] callgraph: handle __RTL functions

On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 13:35 +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On 01/09/2017 07:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > > > > > > > The RTL backend code is full of singleton state, so we have to > > > > handle > > > > functions as soon

[PATCH] RFC: PR78905 define _GLIBCXX_RELEASE macro

As I said in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2017-01/msg00109.html the __GLIBCXX__ macro is useless, but is the closest thing we have to a version macro for libstdc++. This matters when using libstdc++ with Clang or Intel icc or other compilers, because you can't check the __GNUC__ macro. I've

Re: [2/5][DWARF] Generate dwarf information for -msign-return-address by introducing new DWARF mapping hook

On 17/01/17 13:57, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: On 16/01/17 14:29, Jiong Wang wrote: I can see the reason for doing this is if you want to seperate the interpretion of GCC CFA reg-note and the final DWARF CFA operation. My understanding is all reg notes defined in gcc/reg-note.def

Re: [PATCH] Speed-up use-after-scope (re-writing to SSA) (version 2)

On 01/16/2017 03:20 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 03:58:04PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: Well, having following sample: int main (int argc, char **argv) { int *ptr = 0; { int a; ptr = *ptr = 12345; }

[PATCH] -mstack-protector-guard and friends (PR78875)

Currently, on PowerPC, code compiled with -fstack-protector will load the canary from -0x7010(13) (for -m64) or from -0x7008(2) (for -m32) if GCC was compiled against GNU libc 2.4 or newer or some other libc that supports -fstack-protector, and from the global variable __stack_chk_guard otherwise.

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve SHA1 scheduling

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:10:50PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >   > > ping OK. This has been on the list since before Stage 1 closed and should be low risk outside of code using the SHA1H intrinsics. Though, given where we are in the release cycle, please give Richard/Marcus 24 hours to

[PATCH][libgcc, fuchsia]

The attached patch adds fuchsia support to libgcc. OK for trunk? Thanks - Josh 2017-01-17 Joshua Conner * config/arm/unwind-arm.h (_Unwind_decode_typeinfo_ptr): Use pc-relative indirect handling for fuchsia. * config/t-slibgcc-fuchsia: New

Re: [PATCH] avoid calling memset et al. with excessively large sizes (PR 79095)

On 01/17/2017 09:12 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 01/17/2017 08:26 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/16/2017 05:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The test case submitted in bug 79095 - [7 regression] spurious stringop-overflow warning shows that GCC optimizes some loops into calls to memset with size arguments

Re: [PATCH][AArch64 - v4] Simplify eh_return implementation

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 03:00:48PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Here is the updated version: > > This patch simplifies the handling of the EH return value. We force the use > of the > frame pointer so the return location is always at FP + 8. This means we can > emit > a simple volatile

Re: [PATCH v2 C++] Fix PR70182 -- missing "on" in mangling of unresolved operators

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > Thanks, that does address my comments. AFAICT your reading of the ABI doc > is correct, but I'd like Jason to confirm that. I agree. > you're missing the testsuite/ChangeLog entry, don't forget. I don't believe in

[PATCH][ARM] Remove Thumb-2 iordi_not patterns

After Bernd's DImode patch [1] almost all DImode operations are expanded early (except for -mfpu=neon). This means the Thumb-2 iordi_notdi_di patterns are no longer used - the split ORR and NOT instructions are merged into ORN by Combine. With -mfpu=neon the iordi_notdi_di patterns are used on

[PATCH][ARM] Remove DImode expansions for 1-bit shifts

A left shift of 1 can always be done using an add, so slightly adjust rtx cost for DImode left shift by 1 so that adddi3 is preferred in all cases, and the arm_ashldi3_1bit is redundant. DImode right shifts of 1 are rarely used (6 in total in the GCC binary), so there is little benefit of the

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add support for vbpermd instruction and vec_bperm API

Hi Bill, On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 09:58:52AM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu and on > powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu with no regressions. Is this ok for > trunk? Yes this is fine. Just one trivial remark, fix it or not, your choice... > +; One

Re: [PATCH] [ARC] Clean up arc header file.

On Jan 17, 2017, at 3:30 AM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > >> This patch revamps the arc's header file by means of using separate >> headers for different tool targets. Each target header file holds the >> specific compiler backend macros definitions. Thus, we have: >> -

Re: [PATCH] Fix DW_AT_data_member_location/DW_AT_bit_offset handling (PR debug/78839)

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > + else > #endif /* PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS */ > - > - tree_result = byte_position (decl); > +tree_result = byte_position (decl); Let's add a blank line after this assignment. OK with that change. Jason

[C++ PATCH] PR 79091, ICE with unnamed enum mangle

Jason, in r241944: 2016-11-07 Jason Merrill Implement P0012R1, Make exception specifications part of the type system. You increment processing_template_decl around the mangling of a template function decl. AFAICT, that's so that nothrow_spec_p doesn't

Re: [PATCH C++] Fix PR77489 -- mangling of discriminator >= 10

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2017.01.11 at 13:03 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:48:29PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: >> > @@ -1965,7 +1966,11 @@ write_discriminator (const int discriminator) >> >if

Re: [C++ PATCH] PR 79091, ICE with unnamed enum mangle

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: >> Jason, >> in r241944: >> 2016-11-07 Jason Merrill >> >> Implement P0012R1, Make exception specifications part of the

Backports to 6.x

Hi! I've backported a couple of patches to gcc-6-branch after bootstrapping/regtesting them on x86_64-linux and i686-linux. Jakub 2017-01-17 Jakub Jelinek Backported from mainline 2016-12-21 Jakub Jelinek PR

Re: [PATCH] -mstack-protector-guard and friends (PR78875)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 05:43:54PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Currently, on PowerPC, code compiled with -fstack-protector will load > the canary from -0x7010(13) (for -m64) or from -0x7008(2) (for -m32) > if GCC was compiled against GNU libc 2.4 or newer or some other libc > that supports

[PATCH, i386]: Do not mix mask registers with other register sets

Hello! As said above i386.c, inline_secondary_memory_needed: --cut here-- The function can't work reliably when one of the CLASSES is a class containing registers from multiple sets. We avoid this by never combining different sets in a single alternative in the machine description.

[PATCH 5/5] omp-low: implement SIMT privatization

This patch adjusts privatization in OpenMP SIMD loops lowered for SIMT targets. Addressable private variables become fields of new '.omp_simt' structure that is allocated by a call to GOMP_SIMT_ENTER (). This function is similar to __builtin_alloca_with_align, except that it obtains per-SIMT-lane

[PATCH 4/5] nvptx: implement SIMT enter/exit insns

This patch adds handling of new omp_simt_enter/omp_simt_exit named insns in the NVPTX backend. * config/nvptx/nvptx-protos.h (nvptx_output_simt_enter): Declare. (nvptx_output_simt_exit): Declare. * config/nvptx/nvptx.c (nvptx_init_unisimt_predicate): Use

Re: [PATCH] avoid calling memset et al. with excessively large sizes (PR 79095)

On 01/16/2017 05:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The test case submitted in bug 79095 - [7 regression] spurious stringop-overflow warning shows that GCC optimizes some loops into calls to memset with size arguments in excess of the object size limit. Since such calls will unavoidably lead to a

[committed] Add testcase for PR tree-optimization/71854

Hi! This PR has been fixed in r244218 aka the PR78997 fix. I've tested the testcase on x86_64-linux with -m32/-m64 (without/with the PR78997 fix) and committed to trunk as obvious. 2017-01-17 Jakub Jelinek PR tree-optimization/71854 * gcc.dg/vect/pr71854.c:

[PATCH, rs6000] Add support for vbpermd instruction and vec_bperm API

Hi, ISA 3.0 adds the vbpermd instruction, related to the vbpermq instruction added in ISA 2.7. This patch adds support for that instruction, and also ensures that vec_bperm provides access to the three supported interfaces mandated by the ELFv2 ABI: vector unsigned char vec_bperm (vector

Re: [PATCH, GCC/LRA, gcc-5/6-branch] Fix PR78617: Fix conflict detection in rematerialization

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 05:22:34PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 01/16/2017 08:26 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 01/13/2017 11:19 AM, Thomas Preudhomme wrote: > > > Ping? I'm not sure if an ok from Valdimir is enough or if I also need RM > > > approval. > > Vlad's approval is all you need. > > Is

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to Go1.8rc1

In the past, the libgo version number has always matched the Go version, not the gcc release. The libgo for Go 1.7 and Go 1.8 are not the same. If someone wanted to build gccgo for Go 1.7 using an old commit maybe for testing or comparison purposes, the libgo version would not identify

[PATCH 2/5] ipa-inline: disallow inlining into SIMT regions

This patch prevents inlining into SIMT code by introducing a new loop property 'in_simtreg' and using ANNOTATE_EXPR (_, 'simtreg') to carry this property between omp-low and the cfg pass (this is needed only for SIMD reduction helper loops; for main bodies of SIMD loops omp-expand sets

[PATCH 1/5] omp-low: introduce omplow_simd_context

In preparation to handle new SIMT privatization in lower_rec_simd_input_clauses this patch factors out variables common to this and lower_rec_input_clauses to a new structure. No functional change intended. * omp-low.c (omplow_simd_context): New struct. Use it...

[PATCH 0/5] OpenMP/PTX: improve correctness in SIMD regions

Hello, This patch series addresses a correctness issue in how OpenMP SIMD regions are transformed for SIMT execution. On NVPTX, OpenMP target code runs with per-warp stacks outside of SIMD regions, and needs to transition to per-lane stacks on SIMD region boundaries. Originally the plan was to

[PATCH 3/5] improve usage of PROP_gimple_lomp_dev

This patch implements propagation of PROP_gimple_lomp_dev during inlining to allow using it to decide whether pass_omp_device_lower needs to run. We need to clear this property in expand_omp_simd when the _simt_ clause is present even if we are not doing any SIMT transforms, because we need to

Re: [C++ PATCH] PR 79091, ICE with unnamed enum mangle

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > Jason, > in r241944: > 2016-11-07 Jason Merrill > > Implement P0012R1, Make exception specifications part of the type > system. > > You increment processing_template_decl around the

Re: [PATCH][libstdc++-v3, fuchsia] Add support for fuchsia targets to libstdc++

On 17/01/17 13:15 -0800, Josh Conner via libstdc++ wrote: This patch adds fuchsia support to libstdc++. OK for trunk? Is fuchsia only supported as a cross-compiler target, not native?

Re: [PATCH][libstdc++-v3, fuchsia] Add support for fuchsia targets to libstdc++

On 1/17/17 3:27 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 17/01/17 14:55 -0800, Josh Conner via libstdc++ wrote: On 1/17/17 2:35 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 17/01/17 13:15 -0800, Josh Conner via libstdc++ wrote: This patch adds fuchsia support to libstdc++. OK for trunk? Is fuchsia only supported as

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Remove DImode expansions for 1-bit shifts

Hi Wilco, On 18/01/17 06:23, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: ChangeLog: 2017-01-17 Wilco Dijkstra * config/arm/arm.md (ashldi3): Remove shift by 1 expansion. (arm_ashldi3_1bit): Remove pattern. (ashrdi3): Remove shift by 1 expansion.

Re: [PATCH] Add support for Fuchsia (OS)

Gerald - Attached is my recommended patch for changes to the web docs describing Fuchsia support. Please let me know if there's anything else I can do. Thanks! - Josh On 12/11/16 7:24 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Josh Conner wrote: This patch adds support to gcc for the

Re: patch to fix PR79058

Hi Vladimir, On 17 January 2017 at 17:14, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > The following patch fixes > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79058 > > The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64. > > Committed as rev. 244535. > > The new testcase fails to

[wwwdocs] Document significant Ada change

Applied. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: gcc-7/changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.38 diff -r1.38 changes.html 57c57,61 < --- > Ada > > On mainstream native platforms, Ada

[PATCH] Introduce opt_pass::skip virtual function

On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 10:28 +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 01/09/2017 07:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > * passes.c: Include "insn-addr.h". > > > (should_skip_pass_p): Add

Re: [PATCH] Fix testcase for PR c/78304

On Tue, 2017-01-17 at 10:45 +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 16 January 2017 at 19:50, David Malcolm > wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:31 +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: > > > Hi Christophe, > > > > > > > > Successfully bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; > > > > > adds 34

[PATCH][libstdc++-v3, fuchsia] Add support for fuchsia targets to libstdc++

This patch adds fuchsia support to libstdc++. OK for trunk? Thanks - Josh 2017-01-17 Joshua Conner * crossconfig.m4: Add fuchsia OS. * configure: Regenerate. Index: configure === ---

Re: [PATCH 2/6] RISC-V Port: gcc

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Karsten Merker wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 09:37:15PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 02:05:27 PST (-0800), mer...@debian.org wrote: >> > Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> > >> >> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/linux.h

Re: [PATCH] -mstack-protector-guard and friends (PR78875)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Currently, on PowerPC, code compiled with -fstack-protector will load > the canary from -0x7010(13) (for -m64) or from -0x7008(2) (for -m32) > if GCC was compiled against GNU libc 2.4 or newer or some other

Re: [PATCH] avoid calling memset et al. with excessively large sizes (PR 79095)

On 01/17/2017 12:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:06:40PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: The test case submitted in bug 79095 - [7 regression] spurious stringop-overflow warning shows that GCC optimizes some loops into calls to memset with size arguments in excess of the

Re: libgo patch committed: Update to Go1.8rc1

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > > I'm getting further on Solaris now, but the build still fails: I committed this patch to fix the remaining build problems on Solaris. Bootstrapped and ran some of the Go tests on i386-sun-solaris11 and

Re: [PATCH][PR tree-optimization/79090] Fix two minor DSE bugs

On 01/17/2017 02:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On January 16, 2017 7:27:53 PM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/16/2017 01:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jeff

[PATCH][GCC][Aarch64] Add vectorize patten for copysign.

Hi All, This patch vectorizes the copysign builtin for AArch64 similar to how it is done for Arm. AArch64 now generates: ... .L4: ldr q1, [x6, x3] add w4, w4, 1 ldr q0, [x5, x3] cmp w4, w7 bif v1.16b, v2.16b, v3.16b fmul

Re: [PATCH 2/2] [msp430] Remove mpy.o from libgcc

Committed. Thanks!

Re: [PATCH 9c] callgraph: handle __RTL functions

On 01/17/2017 02:21 AM, Richard Biener wrote: So I guess my question is how do you ensure that even though cgraph hasn't looked at code that we're appropriately conservative with how the file is processed? Particularly if there's other code in the source file that is expected to interact with

Re: [PATCH] PR target/79004, Fix char/short -> _Float128 on PowerPC -mcpu=power9

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 07:39:05PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > It turns out the testcase I submitted for pr79004 failed, since I had the > wrong > syntax for \m and \M (you need to use {\m...\M} not "\m...\M". You can use quotes, but then it is "\\m...\\M", like with all backslashes in

Re: [PATCH] PR target/79004, Fix char/short -> _Float128 on PowerPC -mcpu=power9

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 07:00:36PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 07:39:05PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > > It turns out the testcase I submitted for pr79004 failed, since I had the > > wrong > > syntax for \m and \M (you need to use {\m...\M} not "\m...\M". > >

[PATCH] testcase for builtin expansion of strncmp and strcmp

This patch adds test gcc.dg/strncmp-2.c for builtin expansion of strncmp and strcmp. This tests a couple more things such as differences that occur after the zero byte, and something that glibc does which is to call strncmp with SIZE_MAX for the length which looks for overflow issues. I've

[PATCH], Add support for PowerPC ISA 3.0 vector byte reverse instructions

This patch adds support for adding built-in functions for the ISA 3.0 vector byte reverse instructions (XXBR{Q,D,W,H}). The vec_revb built-in function follows the specifications in the OpenPOWER ABI for Linux Supplement Power Architecture 64-Bit ELF V2 ABI and reverses the bytes in each vector

Re: [PATCH] avoid calling memset et al. with excessively large sizes (PR 79095)

On 01/17/2017 10:57 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/17/2017 09:12 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 01/17/2017 08:26 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 01/16/2017 05:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: The test case submitted in bug 79095 - [7 regression] spurious stringop-overflow warning shows that GCC optimizes some loops

Re: [PATCH 2/2] IPA ICF: make algorithm stable to survive -fcompare-debug

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 03:40:00PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > On 01/10/2017 02:56 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > >On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > >>Second part of the patch does sorting of final congruence classes, it's > >>groups > >>and items included in

Re: [PATCH, MIPS] Target flag and build option to disable indexed memory OPs.

On 01/17/2017 05:41 AM, Moore, Catherine wrote: > > >> ... >> Having thought further I agree we can safely ignore DSP indexed load >> and micromips LWXS on >> the basis that DSP code will not run on a MIPS64 processor anyway (at >> least none that I >> know of) so the issue cannot occur and

Re: [PATCH] PR target/79004, Fix char/short -> _Float128 on PowerPC -mcpu=power9

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:39:19PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 07:32:27PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote: > > This patch fixes PR target/79004 by eliminating the optimization of avoiding > > direct move if we are converting an 8/16-bit integer value from memory to >

Re: [PATCH][libstdc++-v3, fuchsia] Add support for fuchsia targets to libstdc++

On 1/17/17 2:35 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 17/01/17 13:15 -0800, Josh Conner via libstdc++ wrote: This patch adds fuchsia support to libstdc++. OK for trunk? Is fuchsia only supported as a cross-compiler target, not native? For the moment. I have a patch that adds fuchsia support to

Re: [PATCH][libstdc++-v3, fuchsia] Add support for fuchsia targets to libstdc++

On 17/01/17 14:55 -0800, Josh Conner via libstdc++ wrote: On 1/17/17 2:35 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 17/01/17 13:15 -0800, Josh Conner via libstdc++ wrote: This patch adds fuchsia support to libstdc++. OK for trunk? Is fuchsia only supported as a cross-compiler target, not native? For the

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Remove DImode expansions for 1-bit shifts

kugan wrote: > Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > +   /* Slightly disparage left shift by 1 at so we prefer adddi3.  */ > > +   if (code == ASHIFT && XEXP (x, 1) == CONST1_RTX (SImode)) > Your ChangeLog says decrease cost for ashldi3 by 1 but looks like it is > done only for SImode. Am I missing

Re: [ping] 3 aarch64/arm/rs6000 patches

> The one thing I find questionable about this patch is that it will set > mem_alias_set for the resulting MEMs to the TOC alias set. Is that > correct for memory not in the TOC? I don't understand why the memory would not be in the TOC (but I discovered this TOC business while investigating

Re: [ping] 3 aarch64/arm/rs6000 patches

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 09:21:38AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > The one thing I find questionable about this patch is that it will set > > mem_alias_set for the resulting MEMs to the TOC alias set. Is that > > correct for memory not in the TOC? > > I don't understand why the memory would not

Re: [PATCH 9c] callgraph: handle __RTL functions

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/09/2017 07:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> >> The RTL backend code is full of singleton state, so we have to handle >> functions as soon as we parse them. This requires various special-casing >> in the callgraph code. >>

Re: [PATCH 9e] Update "startwith" logic for pass-skipping to handle __RTL functions

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 01/09/2017 07:38 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> * passes.c: Include "insn-addr.h". >> (should_skip_pass_p): Add logging. Update logic for running >> "expand" to be compatible with

Re: [PATCH] Add AVX512 k-mask intrinsics

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:30 PM, Andrew Senkevich wrote: > Hi, > > here is one more part of intrinsics for k-mask registers shifts: > > gcc/ > * config/i386/avx512bwintrin.h: Add k-mask registers shift intrinsics. > * config/i386/avx512dqintrin.h: Ditto. >

[ARM,AArch64][testsuite] Fix format string in AdvSIMD tests

Hi, This patch fixes inconsistencies in the format strings used to emit error messages when problems are detected in the AdvSIMD tests. They are not used normally since there is currently no error, but Doko complained about warnings when he runs the testsuite with -Wformat=1. The patch consists

RE: [PATCH, MIPS] Target flag and build option to disable indexed memory OPs.

Moore, Catherine writes: > > -Original Message- > > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Fortune > > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 11:25 AM > > To: Doug Gilmore ; gcc- > >

Re: [ping] 3 aarch64/arm/rs6000 patches

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 09:26:53AM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > rs6000 (Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode): > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00568.html The one thing I find questionable about this patch is that it will set mem_alias_set for the resulting MEMs to the TOC alias

Re: [PATCH] Tree-level fix for PR 69526

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Robin Dapp wrote: > Perhaps I'm still missing how some cases are handled or not handled, > sorry for the noise. > >> I'm not sure there is anything to "interpret" -- the operation is unsigned >> and overflow is when the operation may wrap

Re: [PATCH][PR tree-optimization/79090] Fix two minor DSE bugs

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On January 16, 2017 7:27:53 PM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law wrote: >>On 01/16/2017 01:51 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jeff Law wrote: At

Re: [PATCH] Make multiple_target.c aware of LTO (PR lto/66295)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> Hello. >> >> Not being expert in multi_target area, however it consists of 2 passes. The >> first >> one (ipa_target_clone) is responsible for creation of multiple targets for >> functions >> decorated with

Re: [PATCH] Fix testcase for PR c/78304

On 16 January 2017 at 19:50, David Malcolm wrote: > On Mon, 2017-01-16 at 13:31 +0100, Rainer Orth wrote: >> Hi Christophe, >> >> > > Successfully bootstrapped on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu; >> > > adds 34 PASS results to gcc.sum. >> > > >> > These 2 tests fail on arm: >> > >> >

Re: [ping] 3 aarch64/arm/rs6000 patches

> Um, why are you using use_toc_relative_ref then, if not to access MEMs > outside the TOC? OK, I guess I misunderstood what you meant by "memory not in the TOC", you are probably referring to the MEM generated by the call to force_const_mem, which indeed points outside the TOC for VxWorks. --

Re: [PATCH] PR79079 Fix __builtin_mul_overflow code gen for !TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION target

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 06:09:29PM +0800, Kito Cheng wrote: > Hi Jakub: > > Thanks for your review, attachment is v2 patch, it's also run > regression with x86-64, mips64, riscv64 and riscv32. > and additional, I've run gcc 6 branch with this patch, fix mips64 and > riscv64 and no > introduce new

Re: [PATCH] Fix wrong assumption in contains_type_p (PR ipa/71207).

> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > 2017-01-12 Martin Liska > > PR ipa/71207 > * g++.dg/ipa/pr71207.C: New test. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2017-01-12 Martin Liska > > PR ipa/71207 > * ipa-polymorphic-call.c (contains_type_p): Fix wrong

[PR c++/70565] ICE at gimplify.c:8832 (cilkplus array extension)

The problem at hand can be seen in this simple testcase: int array[999]; void foo() { _Cilk_for (int i=0; i < 999; ++i) array[:] = 0; } The issue here is that the _Cilk_for degrades into an OMP PARALLEL, and we fail to expand the array extension in the body of the OMP PARALLEL. This is

Re: [PR c++/70565] ICE at gimplify.c:8832 (cilkplus array extension)

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 05:43:34AM -0500, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > The problem at hand can be seen in this simple testcase: > > int array[999]; > void foo() > { > _Cilk_for (int i=0; i < 999; ++i) > array[:] = 0; > } > > The issue here is that the _Cilk_for degrades into an OMP PARALLEL,

  1   2   >