Re: [PATCH 3/4] enhance overflow and truncation detection in strncpy and strncat (PR 81117)

On 08/06/2017 02:07 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > Part 3 of the series contains the meat of the patch: the new > -Wstringop-truncation option, and enhancements to -Wstringop- > overflow, and -Wpointer-sizeof-memaccess to detect misuses of > strncpy and strncat. > > Martin > > gcc-81117-3.diff > >

Re: [PATCH 2/4] enhance overflow and truncation detection in strncpy and strncat (PR 81117)

On 08/06/2017 02:07 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > Part 2 of the series adds attribute nostring to annotate arrays > of and pointers to char with that are intended to store sequences > of characters that aren't necessarily valid (nul-terminated) > strings. In the subsequent patch the attribute is

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Use SAVE_MULTIPLE only if we restore what it saves (PR80938)

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:28:22PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:33:05AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:06:18PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > We can have SAVE_MULTIPLE while we do not have REST_MULTIPLE. If the > > > inline restore

Re: [PATCH 1/4] enhance overflow and truncation detection in strncpy and strncat (PR 81117)

On 08/06/2017 02:07 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > The attached patch adds support for a new GCC format specifier, > G, that behaves like %K but accepts a gcall* argument. This > makes it possible to provide inlining context for "artificial" > inline functions like strncpy (with _FORTIFY_SOURCE) in >

Re: [PATCH 1/3] improve detection of attribute conflicts (PR 81544)

On 08/09/2017 01:55 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: the same function with the other of this pair attributes. I'd also be okay with not diagnosing this combination if I could convince myself that it's safe (or can be made safe) and treated consistently. I'd

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Use SAVE_MULTIPLE only if we restore what it saves (PR80938)

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:33:05AM +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:06:18PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > We can have SAVE_MULTIPLE while we do not have REST_MULTIPLE. If the > > inline restore does not restore all registers, the CFI for the save > > and restore can

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Use SAVE_MULTIPLE only if we restore what it saves (PR80938)

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:06:18PM +, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > We can have SAVE_MULTIPLE while we do not have REST_MULTIPLE. If the > inline restore does not restore all registers, the CFI for the save > and restore can conflict if things are shrink-wrapped. > > We could restore all

[committed] jit: add gcc_jit_type_get_vector

On Wed, 2017-08-09 at 20:42 +1200, Michael Cree wrote: > On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:28:57AM -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 20:12 +1200, Michael Cree wrote: > > > > Hi Michael > > > > > I am wondering if libgccjit supports vector types, i.e., can one > > > attach attribute

[Committed/AARCH64] Fix gcc.target/aarch64/vect-xorsign_exec.c testcase

Hi, This testcase checks the assembly and does an execute of it so it needs --save-temps like the other testcases. Committed as obvious after test on aarch64-linux-gnu with no regressions. Thanks, Andrew ChangeLog: * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-xorsign_exec.c: Add --save-temps to the options

Re: [PATCH][testsuite] Add check_effective_target_autoincdec

On Aug 9, 2017, at 5:50 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > > On 09/08/17 12:37, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >> Richard Earnshaw wrote: >>> Except that I think this would be better done as an 'effective target' >>> test; something like >>> >>> dg-require-effective-target

Re: [PATCH] libstdc++: Support std::is_aggregate on clang++ (was [cfe-dev] clang++: std::is_aggregate unusable with clang-5.0/libstdc++-7)

On 02/08/17 00:05 +0900, Katsuhiko Nishimra wrote: On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 03:53:42PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: This __has_bultin check only exists for Clang, so should be replaced by the correct __is_identifier check, not left there in addition to it. I see. Actually I've guessed so, and

Go patch committed: Fix shift type determination

In Go it's possible to construct an lshift expression using unsafe.Sizeof that is technically a compile-time constant but can't be evaluated without going through backend methods. This patch by Than McIntosh ensures that in this case Type::make_non_abstract_type is called on the numeric operand

Re: [PATCH, i386]: Make stack canary location customizable (PR target/81708)

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > Attached patch introduces -mstack-protector-guard-reg= and > -mstack-protector-guard-offset= options to make stack canary location > customizable. These are the same options powerpc has. Attached addition adds

[PATCH] rs6000: Use SAVE_MULTIPLE only if we restore what it saves (PR80938)

We can have SAVE_MULTIPLE while we do not have REST_MULTIPLE. If the inline restore does not restore all registers, the CFI for the save and restore can conflict if things are shrink-wrapped. We could restore all registers that are saved (not ideal), or emit the CFI notes to say we did (which

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] (v2) enable early debug and disable switch for gimple folding

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:39:08AM -0500, Will Schmidt wrote: > I also fixed the (missing) space after > cast for the existing debug code. Thanks for that :-) > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c: (rs6000_option_override_internal) Add blurb > to indicate when early gimple folding has been

Re: [PATCH 1/3] improve detection of attribute conflicts (PR 81544)

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: > the same function with the other of this pair attributes. I'd > also be okay with not diagnosing this combination if I could > convince myself that it's safe (or can be made safe) and treated > consistently. I'd expect it to be safe; it might simply

*ping* [patch, fortran] Fix PR 60355, missing error for BIND(C) outside module scope

Am 02.08.2017 um 15:19 schrieb Thomas Koenig: the attached patch is a bit smaller than it looks, because most of it is due to reformatting a large comment. It is rather simple - checking for an incorrectly placed BIND(C) variable was sometimes not done because the test was mixed in with other

Re: [PATCH][v2] Fix target attribute handling (PR c++/81355).

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 08/08/2017 08:03 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >> On 08/07/2017 10:59 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> On 08/02/2017 09:56 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 08/02/2017 01:04 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/28/2017 05:13 AM, Martin Liška

Re: [PATCH 1/3] improve detection of attribute conflicts (PR 81544)

On 08/09/2017 11:13 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c index 146b76c..58a4742 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c +++

Re: [PATCH] matching tokens: C++ parts (v3)

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:01 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 14:25 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > > Thanks for looking at this. > >> On 08/01/2017 04:21 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> > @@ -27632,6 +27769,9 @@ cp_parser_sizeof_operand (cp_parser* >> > parser, enum

C++ PATCH for c++/81525, auto and generic lambda

In this testcase, when building up an extra version of N to refer to when instantiating the generic lambda, we were mistakenly replacing the 'auto' with a template argument for the generic lambda. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk and 7. commit e42e1cc162267b85adfb624daf1b96fc2f5a6f5b

Re: [PATCH] enhance overflow and truncation detection in strncpy and strncat (PR 81117)

On 08/06/2017 02:07 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >>> >>> You're right that there is no truncation and the effect is >>> the same but only in the unlikely case when the destination >>> is empty. Otherwise the result is truncated. >> Maybe this is where I'm confused. How does the destination play into

C++ PATCH for c++/81359, Unparsed NSDMI error in SFINAE context

The issue here is that we try to determine the EH specification of B::C::C() from within SFINAE context, and we can't determine it yet because the NSDMI for B::C::i hasn't been parsed yet. This patch allows that determination to fail quietly in SFINAE context; we'll try again the next time it is

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:28 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >>> This must be much more specific. How does it impact: >>> >>> 1. LTO >>> 2. Function inlining. >>> 3. Partial function inlining. >>> 4.

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/81751 don't call fflush(NULL)

On 09/08/17 18:39 +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi, On 9 Aug 2017, at 17:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote: This fixes a couple of problems in __gnu_cxx::stdio_filebuf, specifically in the __basic_file::sys_open(FILE*, openmode) function it uses when constructed from an existing

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> This must be much more specific. How does it impact: >> >> 1. LTO >> 2. Function inlining. >> 3. Partial function inlining. >> 4. Shrink-wrapping. >> >> Any of them can impact function stack frame. > > It doesn't. It's

libgo patch committed: Fix math.Ldexp for large powers

The libgo implementation of math.Ldexp declared the libc "ldexp" as taking an 'int' exponent argument, which is not quite right for 64-bit platforms (exp arg is always int32); this could yield incorrect results for exponent values outside the range of Minint32/Maxint32. This patch by Than McIntosh

Re: [PATCH 1/3] improve detection of attribute conflicts (PR 81544)

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c > > > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c > > > index 146b76c..58a4742 100644 > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ssa-ccp-2.c >

Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC, WIP: RTL cost improvements

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 05:54:40PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Segher Boessenkool writes: > > We need it, for example, to properly cost the various define_insn_and_split > > (for which "type" is only an approximation, and is woefully inadequate > > for

Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC, WIP: RTL cost improvements

On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:41:05AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 08/05/2017 11:15 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > For size cost I currently use just "length", but I haven't looked at > > size cost much at all yet. > I think that's fine. "length" is pretty standardized at this point and > it's the

Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC, WIP: RTL cost improvements

Segher Boessenkool writes: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:56:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 08/08/2017 10:54 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> > I was thinking we should have separate attributes for size and speed >> > from the outset. How about size_cost and

Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC, WIP: RTL cost improvements

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 09:56:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 08/08/2017 10:54 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > I was thinking we should have separate attributes for size and speed > > from the outset. How about size_cost and speed_cost? It'd be up > > to the target to decide whether to define

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/81751 don't call fflush(NULL)

Hi, > On 9 Aug 2017, at 17:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > This fixes a couple of problems in __gnu_cxx::stdio_filebuf, > specifically in the __basic_file::sys_open(FILE*, openmode) function > it uses when constructed from an existing FILE stream. > > Firstly, r86756 changed

Re: [PATCH 6/6] qsort comparator consistency checking

On 08/03/2017 10:23 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> Do we really need to rename and poison anything? qsort () in the source is >> something that is most obvious to developers, so trying to force them to use >> something different will just mean extra

Re: [PATCH 6/6] qsort comparator consistency checking

On 08/03/2017 09:52 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 09:33:13AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 08/03/2017 08:24 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote: >>> On Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Jeff Law wrote: >> Well, there's not *that* many qsort calls. My quick grep shows 94 and >> its a very

Re: [PATCH] Switch on *.cc tests for g++ ASan

On 08/07/2017 11:59 PM, Slava Barinov wrote: > * g++.dg/asan/asan.exp: Switch on *.cc tests. > > Signed-off-by: Slava Barinov > --- > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog| 4 > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/asan/asan.exp | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1

Re: [PATCH] Forbid section anchors for ASan build (PR sanitizer/81697)

On 08/08/2017 12:46 AM, Vyacheslav Barinov wrote: > Hello, > > Andrew Pinski writes: > >> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Slava Barinov wrote: >>>gcc/ >>>* varasm.c (use_object_blocks_p): Forbid section anchors for ASan >>> >>>

Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC, WIP: RTL cost improvements

Jeff Law writes: > On 08/08/2017 10:54 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: For speed cost I primarily use "type", modified by the number of machine insns a pattern generates (quite a few are split); and I get the number of machine insns just from "length" again, which for

Re: [PING #2] [PATCH] enhance -Wrestrict to handle string built-ins (PR 78918)

On 08/06/2017 05:08 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >> >> Well, simply because the way as implemented isn't a must-alias query >> but maybe one that's good enough for warnings (reduces false positives >> but surely doesn't eliminate them). > > I'm very interested in reducing the rate of false positives

Re: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprecation of -mstructure-size-boundary

On 09/08/17 16:05, Michael Collison wrote: > Patch updated to remove -mstructure-size-boundary from tests based on > comments from Richard. Outdated comments also removed. > > Okay for trunk? OK. R. > > 2017-08-01 Michael Collison > > *

Re: [PING #2] [PATCH] enhance -Wrestrict to handle string built-ins (PR 78918)

On 08/03/2017 02:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > Well, simply because the way as implemented isn't a must-alias query > but maybe one that's good enough for warnings (reduces false positives > but surely doesn't eliminate them). OK. So it's more about building a proper must-alias query and less

Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC, WIP: RTL cost improvements

On 08/08/2017 10:54 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >>> For speed cost I primarily use "type", modified by the number of machine >>> insns a pattern generates (quite a few are split); and I get the number >>> of machine insns just from "length" again, which for rs6000 is easy and >>> correct in most

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/81751 don't call fflush(NULL)

This fixes a couple of problems in __gnu_cxx::stdio_filebuf, specifically in the __basic_file::sys_open(FILE*, openmode) function it uses when constructed from an existing FILE stream. Firstly, r86756 changed __basic_file::sys_open(FILE*, openmode) to put the call to sync() before the assignment

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

> This must be much more specific. How does it impact: > > 1. LTO > 2. Function inlining. > 3. Partial function inlining. > 4. Shrink-wrapping. > > Any of them can impact function stack frame. It doesn't. It's just to get back to the previous state. Also these others already have explicit

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 8/9/2017 8:04 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> >> I would add a new option >> -fforce-frame-pointer >> that gives the old -fno-omit-frame-pointer back, so that >> users relying on frame pointers everywhere have a

RE: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprecation of -mstructure-size-boundary

Patch updated to remove -mstructure-size-boundary from tests based on comments from Richard. Outdated comments also removed. Okay for trunk? 2017-08-01 Michael Collison * testsuite/g++.dg/ext/packed8.C: Remove -mstructure-size boundary option and

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On 8/9/2017 8:04 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: I would add a new option -fforce-frame-pointer that gives the old -fno-omit-frame-pointer back, so that users relying on frame pointers everywhere have a workaround. that function should also fix the current situation where the framepointer is not useful

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

"H.J. Lu" writes: > > Like this? > > Note that @option{-fno-omit-frame-pointer} doesn't force a new stack > frame for all functions if it isn't otherwise needed, and hence doesn't > guarantee a new frame pointer for all functions. > > Here is the updated patch with a note for

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] enable early debug and disable switch for gimple folding

On Tue, 2017-08-08 at 17:31 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:14:56PM -0500, Will Schmidt wrote: > > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c: rs6000_option_override_internal() Add > > blurb > > to indicate when early gimple folding has been disabled.

[PATCH, rs6000] (v2) enable early debug and disable switch for gimple folding

Hi, [Patch, rs6000] (v2) enable early debug and disable switch for gimple folding Enable debug options related to gimple folding for the rs6000 target. Adds some output to the existing -mdebug=builtin option Add a -mgimple-folding=off option to disable the early rs6000 gimple folding. (V2

Re: [PATCH 1/3] improve detection of attribute conflicts (PR 81544)

On 08/09/2017 05:53 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: (Not a proper review really.) On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:13:07AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: @@ -490,7 +583,9 @@ decl_attributes (tree *node, tree attributes, int flags) | (int) ATTR_FLAG_ARRAY_NEXT)) {

[PATCH] Enable libitm DLL build on Cygwin/Mingw

Fixes libtool calls in libitm. Patch OK for trunk? 2017-08-09 Jonathan Yong <10wa...@gmail.com> * configure.ac: Check libtool flags. * Makefile.am: Use lt_host_flags. * configure: Regenerated. * Makefile.in: Regenerated. * testsuite/Makefile.in:

Re: [PATCH][testsuite] Add check_effective_target_autoincdec

On 09/08/17 12:37, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> Except that I think this would be better done as an 'effective target' >> test; something like >> >> dg-require-effective-target autoincdec > > Right I figured out how to do this - not trivial as it needs a secret flag in >

C PATCH to boolify a few parameters

Bool bool bool. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, applying to trunk. 2017-08-09 Marek Polacek * c-common.c (pointer_int_sum): Use true/false instead of 1/0. (c_common_truthvalue_conversion): Likewise. * c-omp.c (c_finish_omp_atomic):

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > OK, but then both -f[no-]omit-frame-pointer do not have clearly defined >> > semantics and thus shouldn't be exposed to the user? >> >> -f[no-]omit-frame-pointer apply to cases

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

Hi, On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, H.J. Lu wrote: > > OK, but then both -f[no-]omit-frame-pointer do not have clearly defined > > semantics and thus shouldn't be exposed to the user? > > -f[no-]omit-frame-pointer apply to cases where a new stack frame > is needed. -fno-omit-frame-pointer allows you to

Re: [PATCH 1/3] improve detection of attribute conflicts (PR 81544)

(Not a proper review really.) On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:13:07AM -0600, Martin Sebor wrote: > @@ -490,7 +583,9 @@ decl_attributes (tree *node, tree attributes, int flags) > | (int) ATTR_FLAG_ARRAY_NEXT)) > { > /* Pass on this attribute to be tried again.

Re: [PATCH] Convert character arrays to string csts

On 08/09/2017 11:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > I only have the patch I sent you so I can't re-diff. > > Richard. Hi. I'm sending rebased version of the patch. However the patch eats all my memory when e.g. building ../../../libgcc/libgcov-merge.c. If you have time, please try to make it

[PATCH][testsuite] Add check_effective_target_autoincdec

Richard Earnshaw wrote: > Except that I think this would be better done as an 'effective target' > test; something like > > dg-require-effective-target autoincdec Right I figured out how to do this - not trivial as it needs a secret flag in the glob call - if anyone knows a better way of doing

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On August 9, 2017 9:53:05 AM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >>Richard Biener writes: >>> On August 8, 2017 7:36:35 PM GMT+02:00, Richard

[PATCH] PR81747, ICE in operator[]

The testcase in this PR is failing in cse2 when processing the following basic block. (note 31 30 389 9 [bb 9] NOTE_INSN_BASIC_BLOCK) (jump_insn 389 31 39 9 (parallel [ (set (pc) (if_then_else (ne (reg:DI 138) (const_int 1 [0x1]))

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

On August 9, 2017 9:53:05 AM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford wrote: >Richard Biener writes: >> On August 8, 2017 7:36:35 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford >> wrote: >>>Richard Sandiford

[PATCH v2] Python testcases to check DWARF output

Hello, This is a followup on the submission of this series of patches: First, thank you all for the feedback I got so far. :-) I have updated the patch based on it: * As Matthias asked, in gcc-python.exp I first check if

Re: [PATCH][v2] Fix target attribute handling (PR c++/81355).

On 08/08/2017 08:03 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 08/07/2017 10:59 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 08/02/2017 09:56 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >>> On 08/02/2017 01:04 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 07/28/2017 05:13 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > Hello. > > Following patch skips empty strings in

Re: [PATCH] Add -static-pie to GCC driver to create static PIE

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On August 9, 2017 12:18:41 AM GMT+02:00, "H.J. Lu" > wrote: >>This patch adds -static-pie to GCC driver to create static PIE. A >>static >>position independent executable (PIE) is similar

Re: [PATCH] Convert character arrays to string csts

On August 9, 2017 11:15:44 AM GMT+02:00, "Martin Liška" wrote: >On 08/08/2017 03:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> On 11/09/2016 11:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Martin Liška

Re: [PATCH] Convert character arrays to string csts

On 08/08/2017 03:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 11/09/2016 11:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Martin Liška wrote: On 11/03/2016 02:00 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> On

Re: [PATCH][Arm] Test suite failures resulting from deprecation of -mstructure-size-boundary

On 09/08/17 06:25, Michael Collison wrote: > Because the comment (for example) in g+=.dg/ext/packed8.C says > > // NOTE: This test assumes packed structure layout differs from unpacked > // structure layout. This isn't true, e.g., with the default > // arm-none-elf options. > > If

Re: [PATCH] i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access

Richard Biener writes: > On August 8, 2017 7:36:35 PM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >>Richard Sandiford writes: >>> Richard Biener writes: On August 8, 2017 6:38:30

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Matching tokens: C parts (v2)

On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:37:28PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > Jason said (for the C++ part of the patch): > > About passing parser in or not, I'm happy with the current approach; > > adding things to the stack isn't free in a highly recursive program > > like GCC. > (in