ping**0.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-05/msg00176.html
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Instead of a ping, an updated patch. This one additionally supports
registering of nonallocatable coarrays also in MODULE and in BLOCK
plus a test case.
(Changes to gfc_generate_module_vars and
Hello,
[PATCH, SMS 1/4] Fix calculation of row_rest_count
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01339.html
[PATCH, SMS 2/4] Move the creation of anti-dep edge
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01340.html
[PATCH, SMS 3/4] Optimize stage count
Dear Paul,
Following some comments from Thomas, the attached is the version that
I wound up with. Tell us which one you prefer and Thomas and I will
do the honours.
Bootstrapped and regtested on FC9/x86_64 - OK for trunk and 4.6?
Your patch is does the job and is less intrusive than mine
Hi,
The vectorizer supports strided loads with gaps, e.g., when only a[4i]
and a[4i+2] are accessed, it generates a vector load a[4i:4i+3], i.e.,
creating an access to a[4i+3], which doesn't exist in the scalar code.
This access maybe invalid as described in the PR.
This patch creates an
On 05/10/11 07:49, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
This patch implements TLS descriptor support in GCC. TLS descriptors are
described at http://www.codesourcery.com/publications/RFC-TLSDESC-ARM.txt and
blessed by ARM, who have reserved the relocation numbers.
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
On 11-05-25 6:58 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
This patch solves http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49154 for
CRIS.
The problem was in that the pressure classes did not contain SRP
On 25/05/11 20:17, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011 11:26:51 +0100
Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/24/2011 07:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
This patch implements pause intrinsic suggested by Andi. OK
for trunk?
What does full memory barrier here mean?
+@table @code
Hi
I've tested the
#ifndef __ANDROID__
on arm qemu without regression. And also built Android toolchain
without this error.
thanks
Carrot
2011-05-26 Jing Yu jin...@google.com
* ChangeLog.google-main: New file.
* getpagesize.c(getpagesize): Disable it for bionic.
Index:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Xinliang David Li wrote:
Ping. The link to the message:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01303.html
I don't consider this an option handling patch. Patches adding whole new
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi!
The following testcase is miscompiled, because there are multiple
CASE_LABELs for the same target bb in a switch:
bb 2:
switch (x_1(D)) default: L13, case 3: l4, case 4: l1, case 6: l3
l3:
bar (-1);
l2:
l1:
This patch fixes a problem with the patch from Richard/David that was committed
yesterday;
presumably since the patch was originally written before the new libobjc API
revamp, it was
still using objc_lookup_class(), which is not part of the Modern API, hence
currently undeclared
in sendmsg.c.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:43 PM, William J. Schmidt
wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
This patch adds logic to gimple_expand_builtin_pow () to optimize
pow(x,y), where y is one of 0.5, 0.25, 0.75, 1./3., or 1./6. I noticed
that there were two missing calls to gimple_set_location () in my
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On May 25, 2011, at 1:38 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Janis Johnson jani...@codesourcery.com writes:
Archived test results for 4.7.0 for most processors with C++ results have:
XPASS: g++.dg/tree-ssa/pr43411.C
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:45 PM, William J. Schmidt
wschm...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Since I'm in process of moving the lowering of pow and powi calls from
expand into gimple, I wrote some tests to improve coverage in this area.
Most of these look for specific code generation patterns in
Applied to trunk.
Thanks
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 174268)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,5 +1,10 @@
2011-05-26 Nicola Pero nicola.p...@meta-innovation.com
+ * sendmsg.c: Reindented part of the
Hi,
we spend a lot of effort (and disk space) into streaming file/line/column and
sys_p fields of locations. Since often the trees come from same statement, it
is common for those to not change. We even already have current location info
in output_block and data_in, but don't use it.
This patch
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 7:19 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/25/2011 04:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 5:20 PM,
Hello,
this patch ensures that after gimplification also comparison expressions using
FE's boolean_type_node. As we need to deal here with C/C++'s (obj-c/c++ and
java's), Ada's, and Fortran's specific boolean types, this patch alters some
checks in tree-cfg for Ada's sake, and we need to deal
Ping Ping.
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On
Behalf Of Henderson, Stuart
Sent: 19 May 2011 13:39
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR target/48807
Ping
Prompted by the recent tree profiling testsuite failures on platforms
that require special handling for TLS runtime support, I looked at the
testsuite side of things.
While Solaris now works again thanks to Eric's patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01719.html
there
Hi!
The C++ FE creates COND_EXPRs which have non-void type
and the same type on one of the arms, but the other arm
is THROW_EXPR (which has void type).
gimplify_cond_expr knows how to gimplify this, but shortcut_cond_r
tried to optimize
if (a ? b : throw 1) goto yes; else goto no;
into
if (a)
Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com writes:
Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de writes:
* While I get
// var ___iob [59+1]___FILE
now, there's still
var __lastbuf *_FILE
left, with commented
// type _FILE struct { _cnt int32; _ptr *uint8; _base *uint8; _flag uint8;
_file
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
this patch ensures that after gimplification also comparison expressions
using FE's boolean_type_node. As we need to deal here with C/C++'s
(obj-c/c++ and java's), Ada's, and Fortran's specific boolean types, this
Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com writes:
We could certainly duplicate (some of) the logic that %P already uses,
but I though it easier to just introduce a straightforward variant (%p)
instead. It's not pretty, but it worked.
OK then... can you propose a new patch, please, changing as little of
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
this patch ensures that after gimplification also comparison expressions
using FE's boolean_type_node. As we need to deal here
This looks all very hackish with no immediate benefit mostly because
of the use of lto_output_string. I think what you should do instead
is split up lto_output_string_with_length into the piece that streams
the string itself to the string-stream and returns an index into it
and the
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This looks all very hackish with no immediate benefit mostly because
of the use of lto_output_string. I think what you should do instead
is split up lto_output_string_with_length into the piece that streams
the string itself
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
this patch ensures that after gimplification also comparison expressions
using FE's boolean_type_node. As we need to deal here
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
this patch ensures that after gimplification also comparison expressions
using FE's boolean_type_node. As we need to deal here with C/C++'s
(obj-c/c++ and
Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com writes:
On Wed, 4 May 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
Your expansion of the wiki page on toplevel libgcc migration is
certainly welcome: I hadn't seen before that *-unwind.h files and
related macros can be moved over as well.
I've no idea whether they can
As reported in the PR, mainline fails to build on non-Solaris SPARC
targets. The following patch fixes this.
Bootstrapped without regressions on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 with as and
gas, tested with a i386-pc-solaris2.10 x sparc-elf cross with
--enable-werror-always.
Ok for mainline?
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
this patch ensures that after gimplification also comparison expressions
using FE's
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:46 PM,
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:20 PM, Kai Tietz ktiet...@googlemail.com wrote:
2011/5/26 Richard Guenther
Hi Richard,
On 05/25/2011 03:44 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Sorry for being so late. I was just curious...
Tom de Vries vr...@codesourcery.com writes:
The init cost of an iv will in general not be zero. It will be
exceptional that the iv register happens to be initialized with the
proper
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This looks all very hackish with no immediate benefit mostly because
of the use of lto_output_string. I think what you should do instead
is split up lto_output_string_with_length into the piece that streams
the string
2011/5/26 Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This looks all very hackish with no immediate benefit mostly because
of the use of lto_output_string. I think what you should do instead
is split up lto_output_string_with_length
On Wed, 25 May 2011, Jing Yu wrote:
I am wondering how to disable build of libiberty for target? I
Tear out all the target-libiberty code unconditionally? See
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01308.html and references
therein; building target libiberty at all is a bug in my view.
2011/5/26 Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This looks all very hackish with no immediate benefit mostly because
of the use of lto_output_string. I think what you should do instead
is split up
It occurred to me to do another test, building libgcc with and without
the patch and comparing the binaries. That showed a problem - if there
are multiple version files, their order matters. In all cases where
$$(libgcc_objdir)/libgcc-std.ver occurs, it occurs first, so I've
changed the order in
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
+ if (is_enable)
+error (unrecognized option -fenable);
+ else
+error (unrecognized option -fdisable);
I think that should be fatal_error - Joseph?
No, all existing errors for unknown options are ordinary errors rather
2011/5/26 Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz:
2011/5/26 Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
This looks all very hackish with no immediate benefit mostly because
of the use of lto_output_string. I think what you should do instead
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Rainer Orth wrote:
But doesn't this mean that e.g. MD_UNWIND_SUPPORT can only be moved to
libgcc/config for all targets together? How can you poison the macro
when a single target using it is left behind in gcc/config?
Nothing about the libgcc_tm.h implementation stops
This is a straight forward 4.7 - 4.6 backport for PR44643
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg00544.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=172415
Johann
PR target/44643
* config/avr/avr.c (avr_insert_attributes): Leave TREE_READONLY
alone. Error if
2011-05-24 Rainer Orth r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de
PR target/49099
* config/sparc/sparc.c (sparc_solaris_elf_asm_named_section): Wrap
declaration in TARGET_SOLARIS.
OK, thanks.
--
Eric Botcazou
-Original Message-
From: Georg-Johann Lay [mailto:a...@gjlay.de]
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 6:24 AM
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Weddington, Eric; Anatoly Sokolov; Denis Chertykov
Subject: [Patch, AVR, 4.6] PR target/44643
This is a straight forward 4.7 - 4.6 backport for
It's the new slot sharing code that doesn't have support for saving
larger hunks. Having written the original code to handle larger saves
specifically to help sparc, I can certainly understand why the new code
is causing you grief :-)
Thanks for the historical perspective. :-)
No
Dear Tobias,
This looks fine to me. It does the things that you described and is
well hidden behind the co-array associated conditions. Thus it is OK
for trunk.
Maybe I am being stupid but what is the call, in the testcase, to
subroutine test for?
Cheers
Paul
This patch fixes PR48702. IVOPTs does not guarantee that the base
addresses it uses for memory accesses is within the bounds that
the C standard (and the middle-end) would allow. Thus, make sure
that for those bases where we cannot guarantee this we use
TARGET_MEM_REF instead of MEM_REF and
The initial specification of variadic templates required function
parameter packs to be at the end of the parameter list, but that
restriction was soon found to be undesirable; this patch updates G++ to
support packs earlier in the parameter list as specified in the FDIS.
Tested
On 05/19/2011 12:39 PM, Henderson, Stuart wrote:
* config/bfin/bfin.c: Check return value of cgraph_local_info for null
before
attempting to use it.
Needs to mention the function name, and wrap the long line properly.
Index: gcc/config/bfin/bfin.c
On 05/26/2011 06:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
gimplify_cond_expr knows how to gimplify this, but shortcut_cond_r
tried to optimize
if (a ? b : throw 1) goto yes; else goto no;
into
if (a)
if (b) goto yes; else goto no;
else
if (throw 1) goto yes; else goto no;
which ICEs or errors out.
On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
Index: doc/extend.texi
===
--- doc/extend.texi (revision 174216)
+++ doc/extend.texi (working copy)
@@ -8699,7 +8699,8 @@ The following built-in function is alway
@table
On 25.05.2011 19:31, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 05/25/2011 03:29 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
I think the hook is a better idea than the attribute because nobody will
care to mark all offending insns with an attribute.
I don't know. IIRC when I looked at sh or whatever the broken port was,
it
On 25/05/11 14:47, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
The shift must be by a positive constant amount, strictly less than the
precision (GET_MODE_PRECISION) of the mode (of the value being shifted).
If that applies, the relevant number of bits is the precision of the mode
minus the number of bits of the
On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with an
actual 1-element VEC;
Or just push NULL onto the stack and let append_to_statement_list_1
allocate the VEC?
the check in add_stmt would then be unnecessary, as we'd
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:26:58AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/26/2011 06:32 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
gimplify_cond_expr knows how to gimplify this, but shortcut_cond_r
tried to optimize
if (a ? b : throw 1) goto yes; else goto no;
into
if (a)
if (b) goto yes; else goto no;
else
On 05/26/2011 09:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
That is how it ends up being optimized later on, I just think
given how long the bug has been in this is so rare that
we don't need to try to optimize it already at the gimplifier level.
Makes sense.
Jason
Hi,
on IRC we discussed about this, here's the RFC patch. It bootstraps and
causes some minor regressions most probably due to some missing sprinkled
checks for the special clobber insns and sometimes due to having to adjust
some regexps.
Anyway, stack slot sharing is currently using the
On 05/26/2011 09:39 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with
an
actual 1-element VEC;
Or just push NULL onto the stack and let append_to_statement_list_1 allocate
the VEC?
Did you
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2011-05-26 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
* fold-const.c (fold_unary_loc): Remove bogus code.
Index: gcc/fold-const.c
===
---
On 05/26/2011 09:46 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
On 05/26/2011 09:39 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/25/2011 10:21 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
An alternative solution would be to initialize cur_stmt_list somewhere with an
actual 1-element VEC;
Or just push NULL onto the stack and let
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
Index: doc/extend.texi
===
--- doc/extend.texi (revision 174216)
+++ doc/extend.texi (working copy)
@@
On 05/26/2011 02:51 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
Index: doc/extend.texi
===
--- doc/extend.texi (revision
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
On 25/05/11 14:47, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
The shift must be by a positive constant amount, strictly less than the
precision (GET_MODE_PRECISION) of the mode (of the value being shifted).
If that applies, the relevant number of bits is the precision
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 03:43:45PM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
--- tree-stdarg.c.orig2011-05-26 14:15:01.0 +0200
+++ tree-stdarg.c 2011-05-26 14:15:41.0 +0200
@@ -872,8 +872,12 @@ execute_optimize_stdarg (void)
if (get_gimple_rhs_class
Dear Paul,
thanks for the review. Regarding:
Paul Thomas wrote:
Maybe I am being stupid but what is the call, in the
testcase, to subroutine test for?
Well, it is supposed to test coarray decls in functions,
contained functions, and in not-referenced functions.
However, I forgot the [*]
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 03:43:45PM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
--- tree-stdarg.c.orig 2011-05-26 14:15:01.0 +0200
+++ tree-stdarg.c 2011-05-26 14:15:41.0 +0200
@@ -872,8 +872,12 @@
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/26/2011 02:51 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/26/2011 10:34 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
Index: doc/extend.texi
In preparation to move all frontends common tree node building to
the middle-end this makes the Java frontend actually use the
standard routines. It's still severely broken in overriding
things with stuff that does not match the targets C ABI, but well,
Java ...
Bootstrapped and tested on
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 04:29:50PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
To make it a compiler memory barrier you have to expand the
builtin already in the frontend and present the middle-end with
__asm__ ( : : : memory).
Hello,
The constructors (resp. destructors) of a given class K are cloned.
For each constructor (resp. destructor) There is thus an abstract
version of the function and (at least) a concrete version that
actually contains the code of the abstract version.
The debug info generated for a
Hi,
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Andrew Haley wrote:
+Generates the @code{pause} machine instruction.
But that's missing the fact that it generates a compiler memory
barrier, which is important. And if you think it's not a compiler
memory barrier, please explain
a. Why it's not a
I merged one if too eagerly, resulting in not fixing up the
cache for merged types. Oops.
LTO bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing and SPEC2k6
build in progress.
Richard.
2011-05-26 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
lto/
* lto.c (uniquify_nodes): Fix bug in
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 03:11, Alexey Kravets kayr...@ispras.ru wrote:
Here is the patch for this issue.
It is caused by the bug in opencl_get_perfect_nested_loop_depth.
This functions ignores -fgraphite-opencl-ignore-dep flag while
opencl_transform_stmt_list considers this flag.
This patch
On May 26, 2011, at 2:25 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
The XPASS is suprious - that's the whole point of XPASSes. It should
FAIL (well, XFAIL). A patch making it PASS is bogus.
There are deeper reasons for my position. Take a look at:
http://google1.osuosl.org:8011/waterfall
the idea is to
Yes please. I've been arguing for that for some time.
Since you feel so strongly about it and nobody objects, go ahead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-04/msg00410.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-03/msg2.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-03/msg00012.html
Hi,
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
Hmm, I plan to optimize string streaming (since we always stream one
uleb to set it is non-NULL that can be easilly handled by assigining
NULL string index 0). How precisely you however suggest to bitpack
line/column and string offset
On 05/25/2011 02:15 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
The patch below implements just such an idea. The only twist is that
the `explain' parameter is actually a `location_t *' so that when we
provide explanations that aren't produced via tf_warning_or_error
blocks, the explanations are attached to the
Hi,
this is updated patch. For whatever reason we now end up with longer .o file
for tramp3d than with my prevoius attempt (by 9KB). We need at average 15 bytes
for location, well, the encoding of small ints might be better with uleb style,
perhaps with smaller chunk (like 4 bits per chunk as
On Mon, 9 May 2011 18:01:12 +0100
Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com wrote:
How does this look now? (Re-testing in progress.)
The previously-posted version contained a bug in the extv expander,
which became apparent only when testing together with my fixed-point
support patch. This is a
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On May 26, 2011, at 2:25 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
The XPASS is suprious - that's the whole point of XPASSes. It should
FAIL (well, XFAIL). A patch making it PASS is bogus.
There are deeper reasons for my position.
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
To make it a compiler memory barrier you have to expand the
builtin already in the frontend and present the middle-end with
__asm__ ( : : : memory). That will serve as a compiler
Those are the intended semantics (at least those I asked
Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net writes:
Perhaps the doc might explain why is it necessary to have a builtin for
two independent roles: first, the full compiler memory barrier (which
probably means to spill all the registers on the stack - definitely a
task for a compiler);
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
on IRC we discussed about this, here's the RFC patch. It bootstraps and
causes some minor regressions most probably due to some missing sprinkled
checks for the special clobber insns and sometimes due to having to adjust
some
On Fri, 13 May 2011 17:31:18 +0100
Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2011 14:54:47 + (UTC)
Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2011, Julian Brown wrote:
although Joseph's comments have (hopefully) all been addressed.
One must
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:10:32AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
As for why having a builtin: one reason would be portability.
You mean portability to other compilers (I think reasonable amount
of them support gcc-ish inline asm), or to other
On Fri, 13 May 2011 14:58:08 +0100
Julian Brown jul...@codesourcery.com wrote:
This makes makes the requirement for long long fixed-point types
optional in the testsuite (fixed-point.exp tests), since they are
unsupported by the ARM backend.
Tested alongside other patches in the series. OK
On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:12:06 -0700
Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
Basile Starynkevitch bas...@starynkevitch.net writes:
Perhaps the doc might explain why is it necessary to have a builtin for
two independent roles: first, the full compiler memory barrier (which
probably means to
This patch allows padding to be specified per-target for libcalls. This
hasn't been traditionally important, because libcalls haven't accepted
quantities which might need padding, but that's no longer true with the
new(-ish) fixed-point support helper functions.
Tested (alongside other
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/25/11 15:27, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch solves problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49154 for SPARC. SPARC FPCC
registers were excluded from pressure classes because the movement
between them is costly.
I'm afraid I think this is still wrong; the computation of maxbits in
various places assumes that the bitfield is at the start of the unit
we're going to access, so given
struct A
{
int i: 4;
int j: 28;
};
we won't use SImode to access A::j because we're setting maxbits to 28.
Jason
Hi,
Since we don't have movmisaligntf pattern, we need to handle misaligned
load/store in *movtf_internal, similar to *movti_internal_*. OK for
trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
gcc/
2011-05-26 H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com
PR target/49168
* config/i386/i386.md (*movtf_internal):
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 06:46:39PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 09:10:32AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com writes:
As for why having a builtin: one reason would be portability.
You mean portability to other compilers (I think
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 21:24 -0400, Nathan Froyd wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 03:22:07PM -0400, Nathan Froyd wrote:
The patch just requires some shuffling of logic to catch issues now;
below is a version that works for me on the trunk.
This new checking does require modifying
On 05/26/11 12:24, Jason Merrill wrote:
I'm afraid I think this is still wrong; the computation of maxbits in
various places assumes that the bitfield is at the start of the unit
we're going to access, so given
struct A
{
int i: 4;
int j: 28;
};
we won't use SImode to access A::j because we're
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:23:26PM -0500, Nathan Froyd wrote:
Now that we've encapsulated all uses of BLOCK_CHAINON properly, we can
make BLOCKs inherit from tree_base and redirect BLOCK_CHAINON to use a
tree_block-private field instead of tree_common's chain. Doing so saves
the never-used
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
