Re: rs6000: Prefer assigning the MMA vector operands to altivec registers [PR105556]

On 5/10/22 5:35 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > If you want to use this same message as commit message, you shouldn't > say "this patch". Also, try not to use lines more than 72 positions > wide (which handily is also a good maximum length for email messages, > that way it can be quoted a few time

Re: rs6000: Prefer assigning the MMA vector operands to altivec registers [PR105556]

On 5/10/22 5:46 PM, Peter Bergner wrote: >> Out of interest, did you try using v,?wa (so just two alternatives, not >> four)? Or did you think it wouldresult in measurably worse code? Or >> did you decide it is not such bad backend code size explosion after >> all :-) > > I have not tried that,

Re: [PATCH V2] powerpc: properly check for feenableexcept() on FreeBSD

Is there anything more required? On 22-05-03 12:33:43, Piotr Kubaj wrote: > Here are gmake check-gfortran results requested by FX. > > Before patching: > === gfortran Summary === > > # of expected passes65106 > # of unexpected failures6 > # of expected failure

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: Update Wconversion testcase check type.

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 02:58:49PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Thu, 05 May 2022 11:45:50 PDT (-0700), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote: > > On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 06:33:20PM +0800, jiawei wrote: > > > Some compiler target like arm-linux\riscv\power\s390x\xtensa-gcc handle > > > char as unsigned

Supporting RISC-V Vendor Extensions in the GNU Toolchain

[Sorry for cross-posting to a bunch of lists, I figured it'd be best to have all the discussions in one thread.] We currently only support what is defined by official RISC-V specifications in the various GNU toolchain projects. There's certainly some grey areas there, but in general that mean

Re: [PATCH] testsuite: btf: Fix btf-datasec-1.c for RISC-V

LGTM, that's only added a new option for RISC-V and won't affect all other targets, so I assume I can approve that. On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 8:27 AM Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > Similar to 37e65643d3e ("testsuite/101269: fix testcase when used with > -m32"), RISC-V needs to be told not to put symbols

Re: [wwwdocs] gcc-12/changes.html: Document the RISC-V libstdc++ -latomic detection

LGTM, I think document what we really did in GCC 12 is never too late :P On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 2:23 AM Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > --- > IMO this one is worth documenting too, not sure if it's too late for > gcc-12's docs (due to those branch commits) so I haven't committed it > yet to avoid an

[PATCH] middle-end/70090: Register __bdos for sanitizers if necessary

The asan initializer registers __builtin_object_size for languages that don't have it, e.g. Fortran. Register __builtin_dynamic_object_size too (we need both because __builtin_dynamic_object_size computation may involve generating __builtin_object_size as a fallback) so that gfortran.dg/ubsan/bind

Re: [PATCH] [i386] Optimize movzwl + vmovd/vmovq to vmovw.

On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 4:28 PM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 4:03 AM liuhongt wrote: > > > > Similarly optimize movl + vmovq to vmovd. > > > > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,}. > > Ok for trunk? > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > > PR target/104915 > >

Re: [ping2][PATCH 0/8][RFC] Support BTF decl_tag and type_tag annotations

On 5/6/22 2:18 PM, David Faust wrote: On 5/5/22 16:00, Yonghong Song wrote: On 5/4/22 10:03 AM, David Faust wrote: On 5/3/22 15:32, Joseph Myers wrote: On Mon, 2 May 2022, David Faust via Gcc-patches wrote: Consider the following example: #define __typetag1 __attribute__((btf_

[PATCH v2] libstdc++: fix pointer type exception catch [PR105387]

Hi Jonathan, Thanks for fixing the tests and the guidance regarding the patch! I rebased the patch on top of that commit (b6b66006787b0991e94f15c7b5c56403f1eb85fb) and fixed all issues (I believe) which you pointed out. I also added the original reproducer to the test case as you suggested. I

Re: [ping2][PATCH 0/8][RFC] Support BTF decl_tag and type_tag annotations

On 5/10/22 8:43 PM, Yonghong Song wrote: On 5/6/22 2:18 PM, David Faust wrote: On 5/5/22 16:00, Yonghong Song wrote: On 5/4/22 10:03 AM, David Faust wrote: On 5/3/22 15:32, Joseph Myers wrote: On Mon, 2 May 2022, David Faust via Gcc-patches wrote: Consider the following example:

Re: [PATCH] middle-end/70090: Register __bdos for sanitizers if necessary

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 07:41:31AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > The asan initializer registers __builtin_object_size for languages that > don't have it, e.g. Fortran. Register __builtin_dynamic_object_size too > (we need both because __builtin_dynamic_object_size computation may > involve ge

Re: [1/2] PR96463 - aarch64 specific changes

On Fri, 6 May 2022 at 16:00, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Prathamesh Kulkarni writes: > > diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-sve-builtins-base.cc > > b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-sve-builtins-base.cc > > index c24c0548724..1ef4ea2087b 100644 > > --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-sve-builtins

<    1   2