Re: RFD: annotate iterator patterns with expanded forms

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > Now that we're in stage1, I thought I'd bring this up again. For reference, > the patch was here: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00165.html > > So, would you like this for cris and mmix? I could enable it for these, then > we'd need

Re: [DOC Patch] Add sample for @cc constraint

On 4/25/2016 2:51 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 04/16/2016 01:12 AM, David Wohlferd wrote: There were basically 3 changes I was trying for in that doc patch. Are any of them worth keeping? Or are we done? 1) "Do not clobber flags if they are being used as outputs." 2) Output flags sample (with

[PATCH, i386]: Small improvements to move patterns

No functional changes. 2016-04-25 Uros Bizjak * config/i386/i386.md (*movxi_internal_avx512f): Use insn type attribute instead of which_alternative. * config/i386/sse.md (*mov_internal): Ditto. Use EXT_REX_SSE_REG_P where appropriate. Bootstrapped and

Re: RFD: annotate iterator patterns with expanded forms

On 01/01/2016 07:02 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: On Tue, 1 Dec 2015, Bernd Schmidt wrote: The automatic Makefile approach might look something like this. The effect is similar to what happens when you edit tm.texi.in, except the build would not be interrupted every time, only when you modify

[PATCH] PR target/70454: Build x86 libgomp with -march=i486 or better

If x86 libgomp isn't compiled with -march=i486 or better, append -march=i486 XCFLAGS for x86 libgomp build. Tested on i686 with and without --with-arch=i386. Tested on x86-64 with and without --with-arch_32=i386. OK for trunk? H.J. --- PR target/70454 * configure.tgt

Re: C, C++: Fix PR 69733 (bad location for ignored qualifiers warning)

On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > +/* Returns the smallest location != UNKNOWN_LOCATION in LOCATIONS, > + considering only those c_declspec_words found in LIST, which > + must be terminated by cdw_number_of_elements. */ > + > +static location_t > +smallest_type_quals_location

Re: [PATCH] [FIX PR c/48116] -Wreturn-type does not work as advertised

On 11 April 2016 at 20:09, Prasad Ghangal wrote: > > Hi! > > This is proposed patch for > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48116 (-Wreturn-type does > not work as advertised) > > Currently gcc doesn't give any warning with -Wreturn-type or -Wall > option for

Re: An abridged "Writing C" for the gcc web pages

Bernd Schmidt writes: > (Apologies if you get this twice, the mailing list didn't like the html > attachment in the first attempt). > > We frequently get malformatted patches, and it's been brought to my > attention that some people don't even make the effort to read the

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve aarch64_case_values_threshold setting

On 04/25/16 14:58, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: Evandro Menezes wrote: I agree with your assessment, but I'm more curious to understand how this change affects code built with the default -mcpu=generic when run on both A53 and A57, the typical configuration of big.LITTLE machines. I wouldn't expect

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve aarch64_case_values_threshold setting

Evandro Menezes wrote: > I agree with your assessment, but I'm more curious to understand how > this change affects code built with the default -mcpu=generic when run > on both A53 and A57, the typical configuration of big.LITTLE machines. I wouldn't expect the result to be any different as the

Re: [PATCH] Fix missed DSE opportunity with operator delete.

Hmm, this seems to assume that operator delete itself doesn't do anything with the object being deleted. This is true of the default implementation, but I don't see anything in the standard that prohibits a user-supplied replacement or class-specific deallocation function from accessing the

Re: [PATCH] Allow all 1s of integer as standard SSE constants

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >>> Can you please investigate, what is wrong with all_ones_operand so it >>> doesn't accept all (-1) operands? >> >> Does following work: >> >> ;; Return true if operand is a (vector) constant with all bits

Re: [PATCH] Allow all 1s of integer as standard SSE constants

Uros Bizjak writes: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 4:19 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 5:11 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:58

Re: [PATCH] Fix bootstrap on powerpc*-aix* (PR bootstrap/70704)

Looks good to me. Jason On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > As mentioned in the PR, some checking code, in particular the one > in C++ FE's build_non_dependent_expr, may affect code generation, as it can > instantiate templates that aren't

Re: [PATCH][AArch64][wwwdocs] Summarise some more AArch64 changes for GCC6

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > Jim, you added support for the qdf24xx identifier to -mcpu and -mtune. > Could you please suggest an appropriate entry to describe it? > I think the same format as the Cortex-A35 entry in this patch would be >

Re: [PATCH] Prevent LTO wrappers to process a recursive execution

Martin Liška writes: > #endif > + /* Do not search original location in the same folder. */ > + char *exe_folder = lrealpath (av[0]); > + exe_folder[strlen (exe_folder) - strlen (lbasename (exe_folder))] = > '\0'; > + char *location = concat (exe_folder,

[PATCH] Fix bootstrap on powerpc*-aix* (PR bootstrap/70704)

Hi! As mentioned in the PR, some checking code, in particular the one in C++ FE's build_non_dependent_expr, may affect code generation, as it can instantiate templates that aren't instantiated otherwise, which affects the various counters like cfun->funcdef_no, DECL_UID etc. I'd like to commit

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve aarch64_case_values_threshold setting

On 04/25/16 14:21, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: Evandro Menezes wrote: I assume that you mean that such improvements are true for -mcpu=generic, yes? On which target, A53 or A57 or other? It's true for any CPU setting. The SPEC results are for Cortex-A57 however I wrote a microbenchmark that shows

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/70241 (inconsistent access with in-class enumeration)

OK. Jason

[PATCH, i386]: Do not match (const_int 0) and (const_int 1) with const_wide_int

Hello! (const_int 0) and (const_int 1) are never const_wide_int. 2016-04-25 Uros Bizjak * config/i386/predicates.md (const0_operand): Do not match const_wide_int code. (const1_operand): Ditto. Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-linux-gnu {,-m32}.

Re: [PING][PATCH] New plugin event when evaluating a constexpr call

On 04/25/2016 10:08 AM, Andres Tiraboschi wrote: *gcc/cp/constexpr.c (constexpr_fundef): Moved to gcc/cp/cp-tree.h. *gcc/cp/constexpr.c (constexpr_call): Ditto. *gcc/cp/constexpr.c (constexpr_ctx): Ditto. Let's create a constexpr.h rather than expose constexpr internals to all

match.pd: x+x -> 2*x

Hello, a simple transform to replace a more complicated one in fold-const.c. This patch breaks the testcase gcc.dg/gomp/loop-1.c. Indeed, the C front-end folds too eagerly newrhs = c_fully_fold (newrhs, false, NULL); in build_modify_expr, and by the time the OMP code checks that the

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve aarch64_case_values_threshold setting

Evandro Menezes wrote: > I assume that you mean that such improvements are true for > -mcpu=generic, yes? On which target, A53 or A57 or other? It's true for any CPU setting. The SPEC results are for Cortex-A57 however I wrote a microbenchmark that shows improvements on all targets I have

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Replace insn to zero up SIMD registers

On 03/10/16 10:37, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:32:15AM -0600, Evandro Menezes wrote: I agree to postpone until GCC 7. [AArch64] Replace insn to zero up SIMD registers gcc/ * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (*movhf_aarch64): Add "movi

[PATCH, i386]: Simplify emission of SSE constant (-1) load.

2016-04-25 Uros Bizjak * config/i386/i386.md (*movoi_internal_avx): Set mode attribute to XI for SSE constm1 operands and TARGET_AVX512VL. (*movti_internal): Ditto. (*mov_or): Use constm1_operand predicate. * config/i386/sse.md (*mov_internal): Set mode

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Adjust SIMD integer preference

On 04/22/16 10:35, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: OK for trunk? LGTM -- Evandro Menezes

Re: [PATCH][AArch64][wwwdocs] Summarise some more AArch64 changes for GCC6

On 04/21/16 03:15, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Ok to commit? LGTM -- Evandro Menezes

Re: [PATCH] Replace old AWK script (utilizing bc) with Python implementation

On 25.04.2016 16:57, Martin Liška wrote: Hello. As I've been playing with branch predictions and contrib/analyze_brprob script, I've decided to replace the old script with a Python implementation. Improvements: + fixed horizontal formatting + remove ugly utilization of bc that is used for

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve aarch64_case_values_threshold setting

On 04/22/16 11:15, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: This patch fixes that by setting the default aarch64_case_values_threshold to 16 when the per-CPU tuning is not set. On SPEC2006 this improves the switch heavy benchmarks GCC and perlbench both in performance (1-2%) as well as size (0.5-1% smaller). I

Re: [PATCH, GCC 5] PR 70613, -fabi-version docs don't match implementation

On 04/25/2016 08:44 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: On 04/18/2016 01:12 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: On 04/11/2016 01:41 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: Here is a patch to correct the -fabi-version docs on the GCC 5 branch. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00480.html ping^2 Cc'ing Jason as the most

Re: [PATCH, GCC 5] PR 70613, -fabi-version docs don't match implementation

On 04/18/2016 01:12 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: On 04/11/2016 01:41 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: Here is a patch to correct the -fabi-version docs on the GCC 5 branch. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00480.html ping^2 Jim

Re: C, C++: New warning for memset without multiply by elt size

On 04/25/2016 05:07 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: + if (TREE_CODE (arg2) == CONST_DECL) + arg2 = DECL_INITIAL (arg2); + int literal_mask = ((!!integer_zerop (arg1) << 1) + | (!!integer_zerop (arg2) << 2)); Are you

Re: [PATCH] add support for placing variables in shared memory

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 04/22/16 10:04, Alexander Monakov wrote: > > echo 'int v __attribute__((section("foo")));' | > >x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-accel-nvptx-none-gcc -xc - -o /dev/null > > :1:5: error: section attributes are not supported for this target > > Presumably it's

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/70241 (inconsistent access with in-class enumeration)

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > When an in-class unscoped enumeration is defined out-of-line its > enumerators currently don't inherit the access of the enumeration. This > patch makes the access of the enumerations defined out-of-line match the >

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/70744 (wrong-code with x ?: y extension)

On 04/25/2016 11:35 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 03:28:27PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: +cp_stabilize_reference (tree ref) +{ + if (TREE_CODE (ref) == PREINCREMENT_EXPR + || TREE_CODE (ref) ==

Re: RFA: PATCH to tell gdb to skip over is-a.h inlines

On 04/25/2016 11:28 AM, Jason Merrill wrote: There doesn't seem to be any need to step through the is-a inline functions. OK for trunk? Yes, please :-) jeff

RFA: PATCH to tell gdb to skip over is-a.h inlines

There doesn't seem to be any need to step through the is-a inline functions. OK for trunk? commit 1b74375b17e37ab7c5f96944148ff5a6bff3f8bc Author: Jason Merrill Date: Wed Apr 20 10:21:02 2016 -0400 * gdbinit.in: Skip is-a.h. diff --git a/gcc/gdbinit.in

C++ PATCH to implement C++17 maybe_unused attribute

The C++17 maybe_unused attribute is mostly equivalent to the GNU unused attribute, except that it can also be applied to enumerators. I was surprised to see that there currently isn't a table of C++ standard attributes; all the standard attributes we already support are handled by translating

Re: [PATCH, fortran, v3] Use Levenshtein spelling suggestions in Fortran FE

On Sat, 2016-04-23 at 20:21 +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On March 7, 2016 3:57:16 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm < > dmalc...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 2016-03-05 at 23:46 +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > > [...] > > > > > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/misc.c b/gcc/fortran/misc.c

[PATCH GCC]Cleanup tree ifcvt by renaming any_mask_load_store.

Hi, This is a simple patch for tree ifcvt. It renames variable any_mask_load_store to any_pred_load_store, as well as makes the variable visible in file scope. First rationale is name of that variable is confusing with masked load store. In fact, it also covers cases in which data race store

Re: [PATCH] AARCH64: Remove spurious attribute __unused__ from NEON intrinsic

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 05:39:45PM +0200, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote: > > Thanks for the info with regard to contributing, > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:40:11AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > This patch will need a ChangeLog entry [1], please draft one that I can > > use when I apply

Re: Document OpenACC status for GCC 6

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:26:11AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > Index: htdocs/gcc-6/changes.html > === > RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-6/changes.html,v > retrieving revision 1.75 > diff -u -p -r1.75 changes.html LGTM. >

Re: [PATCH GCC]Improve tree ifconv by handling virtual PHIs which can be degenerated.

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Bin

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

2016-04-25 18:27 GMT+03:00 H.J. Lu : > > Ilya, can you take a look? > > Thanks. > > -- > H.J. Hi, Algorithmic part of the patch looks OK to me except the following piece of code. +/* Check REF's chain to add new insns into a queue + and find registers requiring

[PATCH] Prevent LTO wrappers to process a recursive execution

Hello. To make LTO wrappers (gcc-nm, gcc-ar, gcc-ranlib) more smart, I would like to prevent execution of the same binary by these wrapper. For LTO testing I symlink ar (nm, ranlib) to these wrappers instead of hacking a build system to respect NM (AR, RANLIB) environment variables. The only

Re: C++ PATCH for c++/70744 (wrong-code with x ?: y extension)

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 03:28:27PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > +cp_stabilize_reference (tree ref) > > +{ > > + if (TREE_CODE (ref) == PREINCREMENT_EXPR > > + || TREE_CODE (ref) == PREDECREMENT_EXPR) > > I think

Re: [PATCH] AARCH64: Remove spurious attribute __unused__ from NEON intrinsic

Thanks for the info with regard to contributing, On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:40:11AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote: > This patch will need a ChangeLog entry [1], please draft one that I can > use when I apply the patch. * gcc/config/aarch64/arm_neon.h: Remove spurious attribute __unused__ from

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:27 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:51 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add support for vector element-reversal built-ins

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Hi Segher, > > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are > connected

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:51 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> Tested on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk? >> >>> + /* FIXME: Since the CSE

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add support for vector element-reversal built-ins

On Mon, 2016-04-25 at 17:06 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > Hi Segher, > > > > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > >

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX-512] Fix PR target/70728.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 05:06:34PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > On 21 Apr 18:29, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > Hello, > > On 21 Apr 14:50, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > > Hello, > > > Patch in the bottom fixes mentioned PR by separating > > > AVX and AVX-512BW constraints. > > > > > > gcc/ > > > *

Re: [Patch] Fix PR 60040

On 04/15/2016 02:52 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: For both testcases in the PR, reload fails to take into account that FP-SP elimination can no longer be performed, and tries to find reload regs for an rtx generated when FP-SP elimination was valid. 1. reload initializes elim table with

[PATCH] Replace old AWK script (utilizing bc) with Python implementation

Hello. As I've been playing with branch predictions and contrib/analyze_brprob script, I've decided to replace the old script with a Python implementation. Improvements: + fixed horizontal formatting + remove ugly utilization of bc that is used for arithmetics + script is a bit faster (tramp3d

Re: [PATCH GCC]Refactor IVOPT.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > Hello. > > Please consider application of the following patch, it fixes > a coding style issue and a memory leak. Hi Martin, Will do, thanks very much for the help. Thanks, bin > > Thanks, > Martin

Re: [PATCH GCC]Refactor IVOPT.

Hello. Please consider application of the following patch, it fixes a coding style issue and a memory leak. Thanks, Martin >From 6afc975de0b6de76aa51b8c2ef741cd72c76dc75 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: marxin Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:50:41 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Fix coding

Re: [PATCH] add support for placing variables in shared memory

On 04/22/16 10:04, Alexander Monakov wrote: echo 'int v __attribute__((section("foo")));' | x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-accel-nvptx-none-gcc -xc - -o /dev/null :1:5: error: section attributes are not supported for this target Presumably it's missing a necessary hook? Couldn't such a hook check

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:51 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> Tested on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk? > >> + /* FIXME: Since the CSE pass may change dominance info, which isn't >> + expected by the fwprop

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add support for vector element-reversal built-ins

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:09:03AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and > Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in > gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are > connected to the wrong

Re: [PATCH 07/18] loop-iv.c: make cond_list a vec

On 04/25/2016 04:21 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 04/25/2016 03:30 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 02:28:51PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders + unsigned int len

Re: match.pd patch: min(-x, -y), min(~x, ~y)

On 22/04/16 12:20, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 22/04/16 11:34, Marc Glisse wrote: On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 22/04/16 10:43, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 22/04/16 10:42, Marc Glisse wrote: On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: 2016-04-21 Marc Glisse

Re: [PATCH 06/18] move reg_equivs out of gc memory

On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders It used the gc vector type, but isn't marked as a gc route, and appears to be manually managed, so it should be safe to use the normal heap vector. gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-04-19 Trevor

Re: [PATCH 07/18] loop-iv.c: make cond_list a vec

On 04/25/2016 03:30 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 02:28:51PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders + unsigned int len = cond_list.length (); +

Re: [PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:51 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > Tested on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk? > + /* FIXME: Since the CSE pass may change dominance info, which isn't > + expected by the fwprop pass, call free_dominance_info to > + invalidate dominance info. Otherwise,

[PING][PATCH] New plugin event when evaluating a constexpr call

Hi This patch adds a plugin event when evaluating a call expression in constexpr. The goal of this patch is to allow the plugins to analyze and or modify the evaluation of constant expressions. Changelog 2016-4-25 Andres Tiraboschi *gcc/plugin.c

Re: [PATCH, i386, AVX-512] Fix PR target/70728.

On 21 Apr 18:29, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > Hello, > On 21 Apr 14:50, Kirill Yukhin wrote: > > Hello, > > Patch in the bottom fixes mentioned PR by separating > > AVX and AVX-512BW constraints. > > > > gcc/ > > * gcc/config/i386/sse.md (define_insn "3"): > > Extract AVX-512BW constraint from

Re: [PATCH 12/18] haifa-sched.c: make insn_queue[] a vec

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 03:55:15PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > >-/* Remove INSN from queue. */ > >+/* Remove INSN at idx from queue. */ > >+static void > >+queue_remove (unsigned int q, unsigned int idx) > >+{ > >+ QUEUE_INDEX

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add support for vector element-reversal built-ins

Hi Segher, Here's the fix for the obvious pasto separated out. CCing Richi and Jakub as I'd appreciate release manager approval to include this in gcc-6-branch. This fixes some cases where built-in functions are connected to the wrong expanders because of copy-paste issues. These tend not to

Re: [PATCH 12/18] haifa-sched.c: make insn_queue[] a vec

On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: -/* Remove INSN from queue. */ +/* Remove INSN at idx from queue. */ +static void +queue_remove (unsigned int q, unsigned int idx) +{ + QUEUE_INDEX (insn_queue[q][idx]) = QUEUE_NOWHERE; + insn_queue[q].ordered_remove (idx); +

Re: [PATCH 07/18] loop-iv.c: make cond_list a vec

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 02:28:51PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > >From: Trevor Saunders > > >+ unsigned int len = cond_list.length (); > >+ for (unsigned int i = len - 1; i < len; i--)

Re: [PATCH 15/18] make nonlocal_goto_handler_labels a vec

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 02:43:27PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > >- remove_node_from_insn_list (insn, _goto_handler_labels); > >+ > >+ unsigned int len = vec_safe_length (nonlocal_goto_handler_labels); > >+ for (unsigned int

Re: [PATCH 01/18] stop using rtx_insn_list in reorg.c

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:35:16AM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > >- rtx_insn_list *merged_insns = 0; > >+ auto_vec merged_insns; > > I see Jeff has already acked this, but some of the expressions here are > getting

Re: [PATCH 09/18] make pattern_regs a vec

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 02:56:07PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > > > >-static rtx_expr_list * > >+static vec > > extract_mentioned_regs (rtx x) > > { > >- rtx_expr_list *mentioned_regs = NULL; > >+ vec mentioned_regs = vNULL; > >

[PATCH] Verify that context of local DECLs is the current function

Hi, the patch below moves an assert from expand_expr_real_1 to gimple verification. It triggers when we do a sloppy job outlining stuff from one function to another (or perhaps inlining too) and leave in the IL of a function a local declaration that belongs to a different function. Like I wrote

Re: [PATCH 09/18] make pattern_regs a vec

On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: -static rtx_expr_list * +static vec extract_mentioned_regs (rtx x) { - rtx_expr_list *mentioned_regs = NULL; + vec mentioned_regs = vNULL; subrtx_var_iterator::array_type array; FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_VAR (iter, array, x, NONCONST)

[PATCH] PR target/70155: Use SSE for TImode load/store

Tested on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk? BTW, I have a followup patch to use SSE for TImode bitwise operation. H.J. 128-bit SSE load and store instructions can be used for load and store of 128-bit integers if they are the only operations on 128-bit integers. To convert load and store of

Re: [PATCH 15/18] make nonlocal_goto_handler_labels a vec

On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: - remove_node_from_insn_list (insn, _goto_handler_labels); + + unsigned int len = vec_safe_length (nonlocal_goto_handler_labels); + for (unsigned int i = 0; i < len; i++) + if ((*nonlocal_goto_handler_labels)[i] ==

Re: [PATCH 00/18] towards removing rtx_insn_list and rtx_expr_list

On 04/21/2016 01:24 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 06:03:01AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: A vector can have very different performance than a list, depending how it is used. Do your patches cause any measure performance difference for the compiler? I haven't measured, but I

Re: [PATCH 07/18] loop-iv.c: make cond_list a vec

On 04/20/2016 08:22 AM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders + unsigned int len = cond_list.length (); + for (unsigned int i = len - 1; i < len; i--) This is a really icky way to write a loop, the i < len

Commit: MSP430: Optimize 1 bit shifts

Hi Guys, I am applying this patch, developed by DJ, to improve the code generated for the MSP430 when performing a shift by a single bit. Normally a helper function is used to perform N-bit shifts, but for one bit we can save time, and not use up any more space, by performing the shift

Re: [RFC] introduce --param max-lto-partition for having an upper bound on partition size

On 6 April 2016 at 14:54, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Wed, 6 Apr 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> >> > On 6 April 2016 at 13:44, Richard Biener wrote: >> > > On Wed, 6 Apr 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> >

Re: An abridged "Writing C" for the gcc web pages

On 04/22/2016 09:45 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 04/22/2016 10:42 AM, paul_kon...@dell.com wrote: Would you expect people to conform to the abridged version or the full standard? If the full standard, then publishing an abridged version is not a good idea, it will just cause confusion.

Re: [PATCH, www] Fix typo in htdocs/develop.html

On 04/21/2016 02:16 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote: Hello, This looks like a typo to me. GCC 6 Stage 4 (starts 2016-01-20)GCC 5.3 release (2015-12-04) | +-- GCC 5 branch created + | \ v

Commit: MSP430: Update prototypes in libgcc

Hi Guys, I am applying the following patch to update the prototypes in the MSP430 specific part of libgcc. It adds missing prototypes for exported ABI functions, and it changes the prototypes for the arithmetic shift functions so that they explicitly take a signed char parameter.

Re: [PATCH][GCC7] Remove scaling of COMPONENT_REF/ARRAY_REF ops 2/3

> Did you manage to do this yet? I'm flushing my stage1 queue of > "simple cleanups" right now. No, I'm going to have a look this week. -- Eric Botcazou

[PATCH] Fix PR70780

The following patch fixes PR70780 uncovered by a mistake I made when updating the iteration scheme in PRE antic compute. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied. Richard. 2016-04-25 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/70780 *

Re: Please include ada-hurd.diff upstream (try2)

> Attaching the modified ada-hurd.diff. Maybe it is ready for inclusion in > upstream now? Patch is OK, go ahead and commit it, thanks. > 2016-03-31 Svante Signell > > * gcc-interface/Makefile.in: Add support for x86 GNU/Hurd. > * s-osinte-gnu.ads:

Re: Please include ada-hurd.diff upstream (try2)

On Mon, 2016-04-25 at 11:50 +0200, Arnaud Charlet wrote: > > > > Is replacing > > > > +-- Copyright (C) 1991-1994, Florida State > > University-- > > +-- Copyright (C) 1995-2014, > > AdaCore -- > > +--  Copyright (C)

Re: [Patch] Fix PR 60040

Ping! Regards Senthil Senthil Kumar Selvaraj writes: > Bernd Schmidt writes: > >> On 04/07/2016 01:52 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: >>>The below patch fixes PR 60040 by not halting with a hard error on >>>a spill failure, if reload knows that it has to run again anyway. >> >> Some

Re: Allow embedded timestamps by C/C++ macros to be set externally (3)

On 04/18/2016 02:26 PM, Dhole wrote: A few months ago I submited a patch to allow the embedded timestamps by C/C++ macros to be set externally [2], which was already an improvement over [1]. I was told to wait until the GCC 7 stage 1 started to send this patch again. +/* Read

Re: [PATCH] Fix missed DSE opportunity with operator delete.

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:37 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: > On 04/20/2016 05:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> You have >> >> +static tree >> +handle_free_attribute (tree *node, tree name, tree /*args*/, int /*flags*/, >> + bool *no_add_attrs) >> +{ >> +

Re: [PATCH] Fix missed DSE opportunity with operator delete.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/19/2016 10:48 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: >> >> On 04/18/2016 12:14 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> >>> >>> Enlarging tree_function_decl is bad. >> >> Probably using 3 bits for malloc_flag, operator_new_flag and

Re: [PATCH] Don't build 32-bit libgomp with -march=i486 on x86-64

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:56:16AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 07:43:27AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> From 12c6ddcf67593ed7137764ca74043f1a9c2d8fda Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >> From: "H.J. Lu"

Re: [PATCH] Verify __builtin_unreachable and __builtin_trap are not called with arguments

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:24:31PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On April 22, 2016 7:04:31 PM GMT+02:00, Martin Jambor >> wrote: >> >Hi, >> > >> >this patch adds verification that

Re: [PATCH] Don't build 32-bit libatomic with -march=i486 on x86-64

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> On 04/20/2016 04:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >

Re: [DOC Patch] Add sample for @cc constraint

On 04/16/2016 01:12 AM, David Wohlferd wrote: There were basically 3 changes I was trying for in that doc patch. Are any of them worth keeping? Or are we done? 1) "Do not clobber flags if they are being used as outputs." 2) Output flags sample (with #if removed). 3) "On the x86 platform,

Re: [PATCH] Don't build 32-bit libatomic with -march=i486 on x86-64

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 04/20/2016 04:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg01080.html >>> >>> >>> This is wrong, see my

Re: Please include ada-hurd.diff upstream (try2)

> Is replacing > > +-- Copyright (C) 1991-1994, Florida State > University-- > +-- Copyright (C) 1995-2014, > AdaCore -- > +--  Copyright (C) 2015-2016, Free Software Foundation, > Inc. -- > > with only > > +--  

Re: [PATCH] Don't build 32-bit libatomic with -march=i486 on x86-64

On 04/20/2016 04:57 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg01080.html This is wrong, see my other comment on the libgomp patch. See my reply to your reply on the libgomp patch. Since Jakub

  1   2   >