On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 18:39:00 +0200
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On 16 August 2018 17:46:43 CEST, Julian Brown
> wrote:
> >On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 21:56:54 +0200
> >Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> >
> >> On 15 August 2018 18:46:37 CEST, Julian Brown
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Mon, 13 Aug 2018
Thank you Segher, will work on your suggestions.
Umesh
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018, 19:23 Segher Boessenkool Hi Umesh,
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 05:30:48PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> > Please find the attached patch for the subjected issue .
> >
> > Do please let me know your thoughts and
On 12/10/18 8:48 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
A template-argument for a non-type template-parameter shall be a converted
constant expression. But an lvalue-to-rvalue conversion applied to a volatile
glvalue is not allowed to be part of the evaluation of a constant expression.
So this test should be
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:45 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 2:20 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:59 PM H.J. Lu wrote:
> > >
> > > Currently GCC inserts ENDBR instruction at entries of all non-static
> > > functions, unless LTO compilation is used.
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR, while we allow VLAs in some contexts in C++ as
an extension, they aren't standard and the standard requires in those spots
constant expressions, thus __builtin_is_constant_evaluated () needs to be
true if those sizes are indeed constant expressions.
Fixed by calling
On 12/11/2018 02:25 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 3:05 AM Pedro Alves wrote:
>> Ian earlier mentioned that we've wanted to avoid malloc because some
>> programs call the demangler from a signal handler, but it seems like
>> we already do, these functions already aren't
On Mon, 2018-12-10 at 22:47 +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> index 121a91c..652e53c 100644
> --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> @@ -6360,41 +6360,54 @@ c_parser_for_statement (c_parser *parser,
> bool ivdep, unsigned short
Hi!
The following patch adds std::is_constant_evaluated to the library.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
(relies on the previously posted C++ FE patch).
2018-12-11 Jakub Jelinek
P0595R2 - is_constant_evaluated
* include/bits/c++config
On 11/12/18 17:35 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following patch adds std::is_constant_evaluated to the library.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
(relies on the previously posted C++ FE patch).
2018-12-11 Jakub Jelinek
P0595R2 -
Hi All,
This patch adds NEON intrinsics and tests for the Armv8.3-a complex
multiplication and add instructions with a rotate along the Argand plane.
The instructions are documented in the ArmARM[1] and the intrinsics
specification
will be published on the Arm website [2].
The Lane versions of
Hi All,
This patch adds NEON intrinsics and tests for the Armv8.3-a complex
multiplication and add instructions with a rotate along the Argand plane.
The instructions are documented in the ArmARM[1] and the intrinsics
specification
will be published on the Arm website [2].
The Lane versions of
On 11/5/18 10:18 AM, Sam Tebbs wrote:
> On 11/05/2018 07:54 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2018, Sam Tebbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/02/2018 05:28 PM, Sam Tebbs wrote:
>>>
Hi all,
This patch adds a new target hook called "asm_post_cfi_startproc". This
hook is
Thank you Jakub for the information.
Will make a note of it.
Umesh
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018, 17:58 Jakub Jelinek On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 05:30:48PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Please find the attached patch for the subjected issue .
> >
> > Do please let me know your thoughts
On 12/10/18 2:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
+ if (processing_template_decl && value_dependent_expression_p (expr))
You don't need to check processing_template_decl before
value_dependent_expression_p.
I would lean toward checking for value-dependence in
convert_nontype_argument, which
On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 10:35 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-12-10 at 22:47 +, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> > index 121a91c..652e53c 100644
> > --- a/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> > +++ b/gcc/c/c-parser.c
> > @@ -6360,41 +6360,54
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 6:17 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> Hi Alan,
>
> Let's ask David? (Cc:ed). Strange that no one noticed powerpc64 before;
> titan and rs64 aren't so strange though ;-)
The patch is okay with me. Thanks for catching the renaming and the
processor missing from the list.
+ {
+ error_at (loc, "duplicate asm qualifier %qE", token->value);
We have been making an effort to quote keywords, identifiers,
option names, and other such things in diagnostics. In
the message above and all others like it in this patch kit
that mention "asm" the
Hello,
The attached patch, provided by Eric Botcazou (thanks!), installs
definitions of RS6000_STARTING_FRAME_OFFSET and STACK_DYNAMIC_OFFSET
for PowerPC VxWorks, which has STACK_BOUNDARY set to 128
unconditionally.
AFAICS, this is the third OS config file doing this, after Darwin
and AIX. It
On 12/11/18 2:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 04:30:11PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Some of my testing exposed a minor problem in GCC 9's validation
of the type of function parameters referred to by attribute
positional arguments. Whereas GCC 8 accepts all C integer types,
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 08:17:26AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 04:30:11PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > Some of my testing exposed a minor problem in GCC 9's validation
> > of the type of function parameters referred to by attribute
> > positional arguments. Whereas GCC
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Most spots in vr-values* and tree-vrp* check if convert rhs1 is SSA_NAME,
> but these 3 spots don't. It can appear if some pass doesn't fold stmts
> after changing them.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
Dimitar Dimitrov writes:
> On понеделник, 10 декември 2018 г. 11:21:53 EET Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Dimitar Dimitrov writes:
>> > I have tested this fix on x86_64 host, and found no regression in the C
>> > and C++ testsuites. I'm marking this patch as RFC simply because I don't
>> > have
Hi!
While working on the libstdc++ patch for P0595R2, I've noticed that while
__builtin_is_constant_evaluated () directly works, when wrapped into
an constexpr inline noexcept function, it in some cases doesn't. The
problem is that the constexpr call cache didn't take
ctx->pretend_const_required
Hi!
Most spots in vr-values* and tree-vrp* check if convert rhs1 is SSA_NAME,
but these 3 spots don't. It can appear if some pass doesn't fold stmts
after changing them.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-12-11 Jakub Jelinek
PR
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR, x86 (maybe a couple of other targets) isn't an
AUTO_INC_DEC target, it doesn't have REG_INC notes nor wants the generic
code to synthetize any pre/post inc/dec/modify, but does support push/pop
patterns that use those RTL codes.
If unlucky enough, as on the following
On 12/10/18 5:23 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
the other day I noticed that we weren't getting right the first location
of pr53037-4.C, for a variable, whereas the next one, for a function,
was Ok. Indeed, we were passing a location only to grokfndecl. In other
terms, I found a good empirical
On 10.12.18 16:54, Cherry Zhang wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:41 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> On 06.12.18 00:09, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> This libgo patch by Cherry Zhang adds support for precise stack
>>> scanning to the Go runtime. This uses per-function stack maps stored
>>> in the
Hi Kyrill,
I've tested on armeb-none-eabi with -mslow-flash-data for both
-mfloat-abi=hard and -mfloat-abi=soft. Both show no regression and the
former shows some new PASS.
Regarding the part you are hesitant about, the code was taken from
aarch64_reinterpret_float_as_int in
On 12/11/18 12:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 04:30:11PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Some of my testing exposed a minor problem in GCC 9's validation
of the type of function parameters referred to by attribute
positional arguments. Whereas GCC 8 accepts all C integer types,
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 09:56:46PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> commit d90b13427e4940adabc4320c68ca88513dee2eef
> Author: Jeff Law
> Date: Mon Dec 10 21:46:41 2018 -0700
>
> PR tree-optimization/80520
> * gimple-ssa-split-paths.c (is_feasible_trace): Recognize half
>
On 12/11/18 6:08 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/11/18 3:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:46:37PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/11/18 1:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Attached is an updated version of the patch
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:46:37PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 12/11/18 1:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > Attached is an updated version of the patch that restores
> > > the original behavior for the positional argument
On Fri, 2018-12-07 at 17:34 +, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> I'm not an expert on this stuff, but it looks like:
>
> struct cgraph_node *node = cgraph_node::get (fndecl);
> return node && node->simdclone;
>
> might work. But in some ways it would be cleaner to add the
>
On 12/11/18 4:38 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:35:39PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
tree
-maybe_constant_value (tree t, tree decl)
+maybe_constant_value (tree t, tree decl, bool pretend_const_required)
{
tree r;
Could you please describe the new param in the
On 12/11/18 3:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:46:37PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/11/18 1:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Attached is an updated version of the patch that restores
the original behavior for
I've committed the attached patch. It does two things.
(1) It adds checking for a UNIT number when a file positioning
statement contains ERR=. (2) It passes a locus so that a
sensible error message is printed,
2018-12-11 Steven G. Kargl
PR fortran/88249
* gfortran.h: Update
On 12/11/18 11:34 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
While working on the libstdc++ patch for P0595R2, I've noticed that while
__builtin_is_constant_evaluated () directly works, when wrapped into
an constexpr inline noexcept function, it in some cases doesn't. The
problem is that the constexpr call
On 12/11/18 1:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Attached is an updated version of the patch that restores
the original behavior for the positional argument validation
(i.e., prior to r266195) for integral types except bool as
discussed.
This is the failure of the libada build when the compiler is configured with
--disable-shared in a multilib setup, a regression present on the mainline.
To be honest, I don't quite grasp why this doesn't also fail the same way in
default mode. While I was at it, I have done something I had
This is the modified version of the second of my Aarch64 SIMD ABI patches.
While implementing this functionality I found I wanted
targetm.simd_clone.adjust to be called when creating SIMD clone definitions
and also when creating SIMD clone declarations. The current
implementation (used only by
On 11/5/18 12:39 PM, Tom Honermann wrote:
This patch adds documentation for new -fchar8_t and -fno-char8_t options.
gcc/ChangeLog:
2018-11-04 Tom Honermann
* doc/invoke.texi (-fchar8_t): Document new option.
My comments are all about nitpicky formatting things.
diff --git
Committed as obvious.
The attached patch set an expression locus to gfc_current_locus
to avoid a NULL pointer reference when emitting an error message.
On beneficial fallout to this patch required a fix up to the
testcase gfortran.dg/pr70870_1.f90.
2018-12-11 Steven G. Kargl
PR
PR c++/88375 reports that errors relating to invalid conversions in
initializations are reported at unhelpfully vague locations, as in
e.g.:
enum struct a : int {
one, two
};
struct foo {
int e1, e2;
a e3;
} arr[] = {
{ 1, 2, a::one },
{ 3, a::two },
{ 4, 5, a::two }
};
for which
On 11.12.18 22:01, Cherry Zhang wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 3:51 PM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 6:52 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10.12.18 16:54, Cherry Zhang wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:41 AM Matthias Klose
>> wrote:
> On 06.12.18 00:09,
On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 4:50 AM Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> Add test-case that forces alloc.c functions to fail, and check whether fail
> handling is robust.
>
> This is the test-case for "[libbacktrace] Fix segfault upon allocation
> failure". Without that patch, this test-case fails like this:
>
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 2:46 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 12/11/18 11:15 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
> >
> >> I recently brought up the question of the write w/o approval
> >> policy on the gcc list:
> >>
> >>
On 12/11/18 12:17 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 04:30:11PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
Some of my testing exposed a minor problem in GCC 9's validation
of the type of function parameters referred to by attribute
positional arguments. Whereas GCC 8 accepts all C integer types,
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 05:39:25PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, while we allow VLAs in some contexts in C++ as
> an extension, they aren't standard and the standard requires in those spots
> constant expressions, thus __builtin_is_constant_evaluated () needs to be
OK.
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 1:35 PM Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:26:00AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > On 12/10/18 8:48 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > A template-argument for a non-type template-parameter shall be a converted
> > > constant expression. But an
On 12/8/18 4:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 01:15:46AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
/usr/local/gcc/gcc-20180920/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/constexpr-virtual2.C:33:26:
error: non-constant condition for static assertion
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
> I recently brought up the question of the write w/o approval
> policy on the gcc list:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-11/msg00165.html
>
> looking for clarification. Except for Jeff's comment (which
> I'm afraid didn't really clarify things),
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 08:58:34PM +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On 13 September 2018 at 20:41, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> Okay. Do you think we should have an sfk_kind for non-canonical
> >> copy/move operations? That would presumably make it a tad more
> >> straightforward to go from
> >>
Ping re this patch:
"[PATCH 2/2] v2: C++: improvements to binary operator diagnostics (PR
c++/87504)"
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-12/msg00236.html
(...which is dependent on:
"[PATCH 1/2] v3: C++: more location wrapper nodes (PR c++/43064, PR
c++/43486)"
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 6:52 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> On 10.12.18 16:54, Cherry Zhang wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:41 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
> >
> >> On 06.12.18 00:09, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> >>> This libgo patch by Cherry Zhang adds support for precise stack
> >>> scanning to
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:26:00AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/10/18 8:48 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > A template-argument for a non-type template-parameter shall be a converted
> > constant expression. But an lvalue-to-rvalue conversion applied to a
> > volatile
> > glvalue is not
On 12/11/18 11:15 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:59:27AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
[*] The change in the patch is obvious enough to me. All it
does is accept more of the things that are accepted by GCC 8
(enums, bools, wchar_t, etc.) and that inadvertently started
to be
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Attached is an updated version of the patch that restores
> the original behavior for the positional argument validation
> (i.e., prior to r266195) for integral types except bool as
> discussed.
I thought Jason wanted to also warn
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:48:17AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 12/10/18 2:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > + if (processing_template_decl && value_dependent_expression_p (expr))
>
> You don't need to check processing_template_decl before
> value_dependent_expression_p.
Ok.
> I would lean
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:35:39PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > tree
> > -maybe_constant_value (tree t, tree decl)
> > +maybe_constant_value (tree t, tree decl, bool pretend_const_required)
> > {
> >tree r;
> >
>
> Could you please describe the new param in the comment?
>
> Perhaps
HI Terry,Kyrill
I'm sorry to reply to your email after a week, it's a busy week.
Glad to receive your advice, Follow kyrill's advice ,adjust the reservation
to 12 cycles, the result shows that it will not affect the scheduling
performance.
I have modified the patch according to the
On 12/5/18 10:14 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/4/18 8:49 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
What is the "it" referenced in the user's questions you quoted? The
const/pure attributes? Those are function attributes. The text you
are adding is in the type attribute section, so it seemed like it was
Hi Jakub,
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 08:52:12AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> Hi Jakub,
>>
>> > As mentioned in the PR, older binutils (like 2.25) complain on these tests
>> > when using -r that:
>> > plugin needed to handle lto object
>> > The following patch introduces an effective target and
2018-11-11 Tom de Vries
* configure.ac (DWZ): Set with AC_CHECK_PROG.
(HAVE_DWZ): Set with AM_CONDITIONAL.
* configure: Regenerate.
* Makefile.am (TESTS): Add btest_dwz.
* Makefile.in: Regenerate.
---
libbacktrace/Makefile.am | 12 ++
(A message that remained in my drafts box)
> On 3 Dec 2018, at 16:50, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
>
> Matching front-end bits to support Acc_Kernels, Acc_Parallel,
> Acc_Loop and Acc_Data.
Note that this was all originally contributed by Ghujan Lacambre
()
Olivier
On 12/11/2018 12:33 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> Actually I would strongly suggest avoiding alloca completely. This
> isn't particularly performance sensitive code
On the contrary, the demangler is very performance-sensitive code for GDB.
See
Factor out the common handling of DW_AT_abstract_origin and
DW_AT_specification from read_function_entry and read_referenced_name.
2018-12-10 Tom de Vries
* dwarf.c (read_referenced_name_1): New function. Factor out of ...
(read_referenced_name): ... here, and ...
2018-12-10 Tom de Vries
* dwarf.c (enum attr_val_encoding): Add ATTR_VAL_REF_ALT_INFO.
(struct unit): Add low and high fields.
(struct unit_vector): New type.
(struct dwarf_data): Add units and units_counts fields.
(read_attribute): Handle
Both read_function_entry and read_referenced_name implement a priority scheme
for names. The priorities are:
- 1st: DW_AT_linkage_name
- 2nd: Name from DW_AT_abstract_origin or DW_AT_specification
- 3rd: DW_AT_name.
Ensure both functions fully adhere to it.
2018-11-21 Tom de Vries
*
2018-12-10 Tom de Vries
* Makefile.am (TESTS): Add printdwarftest_dwz_cmp.sh.
* Makefile.in: Regenerate.
* printdwarftest.c: New file.
* printdwarftest_dwz_cmp.sh: New file.
---
libbacktrace/Makefile.am | 11 ++
libbacktrace/Makefile.in
Handle DW_FORM_GNU_strp_alt which references the .debug_str section in the
.gnu_debugaltlink file.
2018-11-11 Tom de Vries
* dwarf.c (read_attribute): Handle DW_FORM_GNU_strp_alt
using altlink.
---
libbacktrace/dwarf.c | 25 +
1 file changed, 17
Read the elf file pointed at by the .gnu_debugaltlink section, and verify that
the build id matches.
2018-11-11 Tom de Vries
* elf.c (elf_add): Add and handle with_buildid_data and
with_buildid_size parameters. Handle .gnu_debugaltlink section.
(phdr_callback,
[ Part of this patch series was earlier posted as "[libbacktrace] Handle
DW_FORM_GNU_strp_alt" here (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg01091.html ).
This patch series is based on the patch series submitted here (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg01091.html). It needs
Add an altlink field to struct dwarf_data, and initialize it with the pointer
to the struct dwarf_data for the .gnu_debugaltlink.
2018-11-11 Tom de Vries
* dwarf.c (struct dwarf_data): Add altlink field.
(backtrace_dwarf_add): Add and handle fileline_entry and
Handle DW_FORM_GNU_strp_alt and DW_FORM_GNU_ref_alt references robustly in
presence of missing .gnu_debugaltlink file.
2018-11-11 Tom de Vries
* dwarf.c (enum attr_val_encoding): Add ATTR_VAL_NONE.
(read_attribute): Add altlink parameter. Handle missing altlink for
Hi Andrew,
Please find two small patches which are fixing a number of issues found in the
upcomming release.
Ok to apply?
Claudiu
Claudiu Zissulescu (2):
[ARC] Fix REG_CLASS_NAMES
[ARC] Fix millicode wrong blink restore.
gcc/config/arc/arc.c | 4 +---
The blink is restored wrongly when using millicode and regular load
instructions.
gcc/
-xx-xx Claudiu Zissulescu
* config/arc/arc.c (arc_restore_callee_milli) Don't clobber off
variable.
testsuite/
-xx-xx Claudiu Zissulescu
* gcc.target/arc/milli-1.c: New
Forgot a class name, fix it.
gcc/
-xx-xx Claudiu Zissulescu
* config/arc/arc.h (REG_CLASS_NAMES): Add SIBCALL_REGS.
---
gcc/config/arc/arc.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/gcc/config/arc/arc.h b/gcc/config/arc/arc.h
index 4d01c99a540..80e785e6562 100644
---
Not sure who approved that...
Bootstrap & regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2018-12-11 Richard Biener
* ccmp.c (ccmp_candidate_p): Use GIMPLE API properly.
Index: gcc/ccmp.c
===
--- gcc/ccmp.c
Ping?
On 03/12/2018 10:19, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Ping?
The series started here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg01464.html
Thanks,
Christophe
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 11:14, Christophe Lyon
wrote:
Ping?
Thanks
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 at 16:48, Christophe Lyon wrote:
From:
After the previous cleanup the following is more straight-forward now.
This should make tree-affine behave wrt the "new" GIMPLE world.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, now making
sure there are no codegen changes as expected.
Richard.
2018-12-11 Richard Biener
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 20:58, Marek Polacek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 08:58:34PM +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> > On 13 September 2018 at 20:41, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > >> Okay. Do you think we should have an sfk_kind for non-canonical
> > >> copy/move operations? That would
On 2018-12-11, 11:14:24, Olivier Hainque wrote:
(A message that remained in my drafts box)
On 3 Dec 2018, at 16:50, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
Matching front-end bits to support Acc_Kernels, Acc_Parallel,
Acc_Loop and Acc_Data.
Note that this was all originally contributed by Ghujan
[ Fixed ENOPATCH ]
On 12-12-18 08:03, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 11-12-18 18:59, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 4:50 AM Tom de Vries wrote:
>>>
>>> Add test-case that forces alloc.c functions to fail, and check whether fail
>>> handling is robust.
>>>
>>> This is the test-case
Currently, .cfi_endproc and FUNC_END(__trampoline_setup) are placed
inside the #else branch of an "#if defined (__VXWORKS__) ...", so
non-pic vxworks does not get proper CFI nor a .size directive for
__trampoline_setup. I assume there's no magic reason for that (which
would warrant a comment), so
On 11-12-18 18:59, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 4:50 AM Tom de Vries wrote:
>>
>> Add test-case that forces alloc.c functions to fail, and check whether fail
>> handling is robust.
>>
>> This is the test-case for "[libbacktrace] Fix segfault upon allocation
>> failure".
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:03:08AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 8:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 08:44:00AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2018-11-22 10:40:31.179683319 +0100
> > > > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md
...specifically, those for builtins. Soft float can be enabled
implicitly, too (for certain CPUs for example). We should use
rs6000_isa_flags instead, to decide whether to expand a builtin or
to bail out with an error instead.
Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}. Committing.
Segher
On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 9:13 PM Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 06:25:31PM +, Andrew Jenner wrote:
> > Sorry for the slow response on this, I was on vacation last week.
> >
> > On 03/12/2018 21:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >I'd give the maintainers the last week to act
Hi Indu!
I recently saw that you just started contributing to GCC, so: welcome,
and enjoy to journey!
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 12:54:09 -0800, Indu Bhagat wrote:
> On 12/06/2018 05:54 PM, Indu Bhagat wrote:
> > [...]
Thanks for looking into this issue again. As I said in private email,
such things
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 5:56 AM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> This is a pre-req for fixing 80520. Essentially the goal here is to
> keep the key code in this form:
>
>
> [ ... ]
> if (_20 != 0)
> goto ; [50.00%]
> else
> goto ; [50.00%]
>
>[local count: 531502203]:
> _18 = _25 ^
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As mentioned in the PR, older binutils (like 2.25) complain on these tests
> when using -r that:
> plugin needed to handle lto object
> The following patch introduces an effective target and guards those tests on
> a linker with this issue
Hi!
The following patch avoids -Wmissing-attributes warnings in quadmath
headers.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, committed to trunk.
2018-12-11 Jakub Jelinek
PR c/88430
* quadmath_weak.h (__qmath2): Add __quadmath_throw.
---
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 9:14 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:03:08AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 8:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 08:44:00AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > > > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 8:54 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 08:44:00AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2018-11-22 10:40:31.179683319 +0100
> > > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2018-12-10 11:24:49.785830186 +0100
> > > @@ -17195,6 +17195,24 @@
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 08:52:12AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
>
> > As mentioned in the PR, older binutils (like 2.25) complain on these tests
> > when using -r that:
> > plugin needed to handle lto object
> > The following patch introduces an effective target and guards those tests on
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:59:27AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> [*] The change in the patch is obvious enough to me. All it
> does is accept more of the things that are accepted by GCC 8
> (enums, bools, wchar_t, etc.) and that inadvertently started
> to be rejected as a result of my prior
On 12/11/18 10:15 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 09:56:46PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>> commit d90b13427e4940adabc4320c68ca88513dee2eef
>> Author: Jeff Law
>> Date: Mon Dec 10 21:46:41 2018 -0700
>>
>> PR tree-optimization/80520
>> *
On 12/11/18 11:15 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
I recently brought up the question of the write w/o approval
policy on the gcc list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-11/msg00165.html
looking for clarification. Except for Jeff's comment (which
I'm afraid
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 3:51 PM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 6:52 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
> >
> > On 10.12.18 16:54, Cherry Zhang wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:41 AM Matthias Klose
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 06.12.18 00:09, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > >>> This
The following should fix PR88448, I've reverted the semantics changing
part of the gimple_assign_set_rhs_* previous change settling for
an alternate fix for the tree-complex.c issue.
Bootstrap & regtest in progress on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2018-12-11 Richard Biener
PR
1 - 100 of 139 matches
Mail list logo
