Re: [patch,testsuite] Support dg-require-effective-target label_offsets.

Georg-Johann Lay writes: > On 28.10.2016 17:58, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Oct 27, 2016, at 3:16 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >>> >>> Now imagine some arithmetic like & - & This might result in >>> one or two stub addresses, and difference between such addresses is a >>> complete

Re: [PATCH], Fix PR 77993, PowerPC bootstrap on 32-bit systems

Unfortunately, I committed an earlier version of the patch that was buggy. I have updated the trunk to include the proper version of the file rs6000.h that does bootstrap. Sorry about htat. -- Michael Meissner, IBM IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460-6245, USA email:

Re: [patch,testsuite] Support dg-require-effective-target label_offsets.

On Nov 3, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > On 28.10.2016 17:58, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Oct 27, 2016, at 3:16 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >>> >>> Now imagine some arithmetic like & - & This might result in >>> one or two stub addresses, and

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR54679 Erroneous "Expected P edit descriptor" in conjunction with L descriptor

On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 08:30:46PM -0700, Jerry DeLisle wrote: > > OK for trunk? > > 2016-10-29 Jerry DeLisle > > PR fortran/54679 > * io.c (check_format): Adjust checks for FMT_L to treat a zero > width as an extension, giving warnings or error as

Re: [PATCH, Fortran, v1] Restructure initialization of allocatable components

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:16:48PM +0100, Andre Vehreschild wrote: > > Bootstraps and regtests fine on x86_64-linux/F23. Ok for trunk? > > @Dominique: Would you give it a go on your open patch collection? Maybe it > fixes one PR, but I am not very hopeful, because the patch is merely removing >

Re: [PATCH] [ARC] Various small miscellaneous fixes.

* Claudiu Zissulescu [2016-11-01 16:28:34 +0100]: > This is an updated version of the patch that can be applied as is. > > Ok to apply? > Claudiu > > gcc/ > 2016-05-09 Claudiu Zissulescu > > * config/arc/arc.c

Re: [PATCH], PR 78192, Fix PowerPC ISA 3.0 xxextractaw/vextractu{b,h} on little endian

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 06:22:11PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > Aaron has been running tests on the simulator, and some of the tests fails on > little endian systems. The failing tests do int extracts from a V4SImode > vector. In looking at the code, the vector index was adjusted when the

Re: [PATCH] [ARC] New option handling, refurbish multilib support.

* Claudiu Zissulescu [2016-10-31 16:46:17 +0100]: > Please find the updated patch. > > What is new: > - The .def files are having a comment block on how to add new lines. > - The arc_seen_option is not used. > - The arc_cpu* variables are not used. > > Please

[PATCH], PR 78192, Fix PowerPC ISA 3.0 xxextractaw/vextractu{b,h} on little endian

Aaron has been running tests on the simulator, and some of the tests fails on little endian systems. The failing tests do int extracts from a V4SImode vector. In looking at the code, the vector index was adjusted when the low level extract instruction was created, and then adjusted again within

[PATCH] Fix wrong declarations of builtin functions

Hi, I thought in preparation of the new C++ warning about wrong declarations of builtin functions it would be good to fix some of the more obvious bugs in the testsuite first. Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Is it OK for trunk? Thanks Bernd. 2016-11-03 Bernd Edlinger

Re: [PATCH] Generate reproducible output independently of the build-path

On Nov 3, 2016, at 1:01 PM, Ximin Luo wrote: > Log snippets attached. Ick. You missed the utility of contrib/compare_tests. :-) If you say: contrib/compare_tests oldbuilddir newbuilddir You can then sit back and see everything as you'd expect and want. The output is

Re: [PATCH], Fix PR 77993, PowerPC bootstrap on 32-bit systems

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 04:05:59PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md (revision 241715) > +++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.md (working copy) > @@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ >(TF "TARGET_HARD_FLOAT > && (TARGET_FPRS || TARGET_E500_DOUBLE) > &&

[patch] Clean up WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS & LOAD_EXTEND_OP tests

Hi, WORD_REGISTER_OPERATIONS and LOAD_EXTEND_OP are partially used directly as preprocessor macros and partially tested in the code. This patch brings a bit of consistency into this by converting the remaining macro cases. Tested on SPARC/Solaris and x86-64/Linux, OK for the mainline?

Add missing symbols for versioned namespace

Hi I might not be the right one to propose this patch as I am not sure that I fully understand gnu-versioned-namespace.ver organization. But with it following test failures when using versioned namespace vanish: FAIL: 20_util/allocator/overaligned.cc (test for excess errors) FAIL:

[PATCH], Fix PR 77993, PowerPC bootstrap on 32-bit systems

This patch fixes PR target/77993, which is a bug preventing bootstrapping on 32-bit PowerPC Linux targets. The issue is that some of the insns that support IFmode (IBM extended double mode when long double is IEEE 128-bit floating point in the future) did not check for -msoft-float, and disable

Re: [PATCH] Generate reproducible output independently of the build-path

Ximin Luo: > Testing > === > > I've tested these patches on a Debian testing/unstable x86_64-linux-gnu > system. > So far I've only run the new tests that this patch adds, on a > disable-bootstrap > build. I will do a full bootstrap and run the full testsuite over the next few > days, both

Re: [PATCH, C++] Warn on redefinition of builtin functions (PR c++/71973)

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 11/02/16 18:51, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On 11/02/2016 02:11 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >>> On 11/01/16 19:15, Bernd Edlinger wrote: On 11/01/16 18:11, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 11:45

Re: [match.pd] Fix for PR35691

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Richard Biener wrote: The transform would also work for vectors (element_precision for the test but also a value-matching zero which should ensure the same number of elements). Um sorry, I didn't get how to check vectors to be of equal length by a matching zero. Could you

Re: [PATCH] DW_TAG_ptr_to_member_type for PMF and DW_AT_{,rvalue_}reference for those (take 2)

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 01:19:09PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 04:44:05PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> >> which

Re: [fixincludes, v3] Don't define libstdc++-internal macros in Solaris 10+

On 11/03/16 07:11, Rainer Orth wrote: Ok for mainline now, and for backports to the gcc-6 and gcc-5 branches after some soak time? Yes, please. Thanks.

Re: [PATCH] Print repeated rtl vector elements in a nicer way

On Thu, 2016-11-03 at 17:43 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 11/03/2016 05:35 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: > > > > * print-rtl.c (print_rtx_operand_codes_E_and_V): Print how many > > times > > an element is repeated istead of printing each repeated > > element. > > "instead" > > > --- > >

Re: [match.pd] Fix for PR35691

On November 3, 2016 6:11:07 PM GMT+01:00, Marc Glisse wrote: >On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> On 3 November 2016 at 16:13, Richard Biener >wrote: >>> On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >>> Hi Richard, The

Re: [match.pd] Fix for PR35691

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: Hi Richard, The attached patch tries to fix PR35691, by adding the following two transforms to match.pd: (x == 0 && y == 0) -> (x | typeof(x)(y)) == 0. (x != 0 || y != 0) -> (x | typeof(x)(y)) != 0. For

Re: [PATCH] Add mcpu flag for Qualcomm falkor core

On 3 November 2016 at 23:08, Andrew Pinski wrote: > This patch no longer applies after the recent changes (starting around > a month ago) to aarch64-cores.def. Please updat the patch for the > recent changes Sorry about that, I'll post an updated patch shortly. Siddhesh

[PATCH] [ARM] Eliminate SUBTARGET_CPU_DEFAULT

Over the years, GCC has had various ways of setting the default CPU. As things have changed, the ARM back-end hasn't necessarily kept up with some of the changes and this has resulted in some convoluted logic in places. This patch cleans up some of this and eliminates entirely the need for

Re: [gomp4] Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading" (was: [PATCH] Add fopt-info-oacc)

This patch has proven to be effective at warning users when the compiler falls back to host execution due to insufficient parallelism (at least from parloop's perspective) inside kernels regions. At the moment, acc kernels are restricted to gang-level parallelism. Consequently, if parloops fails

Re: [Patch, rtl] PR middle-end/78016, keep REG_NOTE order during insn copy

On 03/11/16 13:01, Bernd Schmidt wrote: Index: gcc/emit-rtl.c === --- gcc/emit-rtl.c (revision 241233) +++ gcc/emit-rtl.c (working copy) @@ -6169,17 +6169,18 @@ emit_copy_of_insn_after (rtx_insn *insn, which may be

[PATCH] libiberty: Add Rust symbol demangling.

Adds Rust symbol demangler. Rust mangles symbols using GNU_V3 style, adding a hash and various special character subtitutions. This adds a new rust style to cplus_demangle and adds 3 helper functions rust_demangle, rust_demangle_sym and rust_is_mangled. rust-demangle.c was written by David. Mark

Re: [RFC] Handle unary pass-through jump functions for ipa-vrp

Hi, On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 02:03:47PM +1100, kugan wrote: > > ...snip... > > I have also separated the constant parameter conversion out and posted as > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg02309.html. This is now > handling just unary pass-through jump functions. > > Bootstrapped and

Re: [PATCH] DW_TAG_ptr_to_member_type for PMF and DW_AT_{,rvalue_}reference for those

Hello all, On 11/02/2016 05:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 04:44:05PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: You could find an Ada test that uses the code and verify that the output stays the same? I can try to find the patch that introduced it and if it contained any testcases.

[PING!] Re: [PATCH, Fortran] DEC Compatibility: Default missing exponents to 0 with -fdec

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-10/msg00222.html On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Fritz Reese wrote: > All, > > Attached is a patch to the GNU Fortran front-end and runtime library > (libgfortran) which accepts real numbers with missing exponents as if > '0' was given

Re: [match.pd] Fix for PR35691

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: On 3 November 2016 at 16:13, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: Hi Richard, The attached patch tries to fix PR35691, by adding the following two transforms to match.pd: (x == 0 && y == 0) ->

Re: [Patch, testsuite] Add new effective-target_store_merge

On Nov 3, 2016, at 2:29 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > > The below patch adds a new effective target keyword (store_merge) for > use in the store_merging_xxx.c tests. > > The tests currently require non_strict_align, but they still fail for the > avr.

[PATCH, GCC/ARM] Fix PR77904: callee-saved register trashed when clobbering sp

Hi, When using a callee-saved register to save the frame pointer the Thumb-1 prologue fails to save the callee-saved register before that. For ARM and Thumb-2 targets the frame pointer is handled as a special case but nothing is done for Thumb-1 targets. This patch adds the same logic for

[PATCH] Fix dwarf2out related bootstrap failure on Solaris (PR debug/78191)

Hi! My recent optimize_abbrev_table optimization apparently broke Solaris bootstrap. The bug is specific I think just to -gdwarf-{2,3} -gno-strict-dwarf, where DW_FORM_exprloc can't be used for location expressions and some location expression contains

Re: [PATCH] Print repeated rtl vector elements in a nicer way

On 11/03/2016 05:35 PM, Martin Jambor wrote: * print-rtl.c (print_rtx_operand_codes_E_and_V): Print how many times an element is repeated istead of printing each repeated element. "instead" --- gcc/print-rtl.c | 15 ++- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1

[PATCH] DW_TAG_ptr_to_member_type for PMF and DW_AT_{,rvalue_}reference for those (take 2)

On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 01:19:09PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 04:44:05PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> which means if gen_type_die or gen_type_die_with_usage doesn't > >> use the langhook,

[PATCH] Print repeated rtl vector elements in a nicer way

Hi, this patch comes from our GCN BE branch. Because vectors of that architectures have many elements, RTL dumps can get quite unwieldy when all elements are printed out all the time. However, pretty much all the time it is the same value repeated over and over again, which lead us to the

Re: [ipa-vrp] ice in set_value_range

Hi, On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 01:58:13PM +1100, kugan wrote: > > Do I understand it correctly that extract_range_from_unary_expr deals > > with any potential type conversions better (compared to what you did > > before here)? > > Yes, this can be wrong at times too as reported in >

[openacc] add warnings for unused parallelism

OpenACC permits the user to request more gang, worker and vector level parallelism than what the compiler can utilize. For instance, if the user writes worker routine without including a worker-partitioned loop, the compiler will not generate worker-partitioned code for that function. The intent

Re: [PATCH] Add mcpu flag for Qualcomm falkor core

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > This adds an mcpu option for the upcoming Qualcomm Falkor core. This > is identical to the qdf24xx part that was added earlier and hence > retains the same tuning structure and continues to have the a57 >

[SPARC] Remove couple of obsolete patterns

The vec_interleave_{low, high} standard patterns were removed 5 years ago. Tested on SPARC/Solaris, applied on the mainline. 2016-11-03 Eric Botcazou * config/sparc/sparc.md (vec_interleave_lowv8qi): Delete. (vec_interleave_highv8qi): Likewise. --

[PATCH] combine lhs zero_extract fix (PR78186)

I managed to forget to mask the thing inserted. Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}, and Bin tested on arm. Applying to trunk. Segher 2016-11-03 Segher Boessenkool PR rtl-optimization/78186 * combine.c (change_zero_ext): Mask the RHS of a

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Improve ivopts group costs

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Evgeny Kudryashov wrote: > Hello, > > I'm facing the following problem related to ivopts. The problem is that GCC > generates a lot of induction variables and as a result there is an > unnecessary increase of stack usage and register pressure.

Re: [RFC] Check number of uses in simplify_cond_using_ranges().

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 04:29:05PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Is VRP the right pass to do this optimisation or should a later > > pass rather attempt to eliminate the new use of b_5 instead? Uli > > has brought up the idea a mini "sign extend elimination" pass that > > checks if the result

Re: [PATCH] bb-reorder: Improve compgotos pass (PR71785)

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:29:07AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 02:51:41PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > >> >> I don't believe it needs a cleanup on every iteration. One cleanup

Re: [RFC] Check number of uses in simplify_cond_using_ranges().

> Is VRP the right pass to do this optimisation or should a later > pass rather attempt to eliminate the new use of b_5 instead? Uli > has brought up the idea a mini "sign extend elimination" pass that > checks if the result of a sign extend could be replaced by the > original quantity in all

Re: [PATCH] PR77359: Properly align local variables in functions calling alloca.

[Please cc me and Segher on PowerPC / AIX patches.] I bootstrapped successfully with the patch and ran the testsuite. Without patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-11/msg00186.html With patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-11/msg00233.html Not exactly the same

Re: [patch,testsuite] Support dg-require-effective-target label_offsets.

On 28.10.2016 17:58, Mike Stump wrote: On Oct 27, 2016, at 3:16 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: Now imagine some arithmetic like & - & This might result in one or two stub addresses, and difference between such addresses is a complete different thing than the difference between

Re: [PATCH] Make direct emission of time profiler counter

> > 2016-10-31 Martin Liska > > * libgcov-profiler.c (__gcov_time_profiler): Remove. > (__gcov_time_profiler_atomic): Likewise. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2016-10-31 Martin Liska > > * profile.c (instrument_values): Fix coding style. >

Re: [RFC] Check number of uses in simplify_cond_using_ranges().

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 04:03:22PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > I've been trying to fix some bad tree-ssa related optimisation for > s390x and come up with the attached experimental patch. The patch > is not really good - it breaks some situations in which the > optimisation was useful. With

[RFC] Check number of uses in simplify_cond_using_ranges().

I've been trying to fix some bad tree-ssa related optimisation for s390x and come up with the attached experimental patch. The patch is not really good - it breaks some situations in which the optimisation was useful. With this code: void bar(long); void foo (char a) { long l;

[PATCH] Make direct emission of time profiler counter

Hello. As Honza noticed we spent quite some time in __gcov_time_profiler: perf report for Postgres make check command: 4.10% postgres postgres[.]__gcov_time_profiler Thus I rewrote the profiling code directly to GIMPLE statements: _4 = __gcov7.main[0]; if (_4 == 0) goto ; else

Re: [match.pd] Fix for PR35691

On 3 November 2016 at 16:13, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> Hi Richard, >> The attached patch tries to fix PR35691, by adding the following two >> transforms to match.pd: >> (x == 0 && y == 0) -> (x | typeof(x)(y)) == 0. >> (x != 0

Re: [patch, libgomp, OpenACC] Additional enter/exit data map handling

Ping this patch again. On 2016/9/21 12:43 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: >> +/* Returns the number of mappings associated with the pointer or pset. PSET >> > + have three mappings, whereas pointer have two. */ >> > + >> > static int >> > -find_pset (int pos, size_t mapnum, unsigned short

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Introduce -fsanitize=use-after-scope (v2)

On 11/03/2016 03:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 03:02:21PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: >>> But how would you be able to find out if there isn't any return *ptr; after >>> the scope or similar (as MEM_REF)? With is_gimple_reg, they will be turned >>> into SSA form and you can

[fixincludes, v3] Don't define libstdc++-internal macros in Solaris 10+

As I've noticed some time ago, recent versions of Solaris include this little gem: #if __cplusplus >= 201103L #undef _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH #undef _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_MATH_TR1 #endif This renders a couple of perfectly good libstdc++ tests as UNSUPPORTED and is completely unsustainable. Agreement

[PATCH GCC]Clean pedantic calls and useless lvalue code in fold_cond_expr_with_comparison

Hi, According to analysis given by https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-10/msg00228.html, calls to pedantic_non_lvalue_loc and code handling lvalue in fold_cond_expr_with_comparison are useless now. Given this is complicated legacy code, it may be better to change code step by step, rather than

Re: [PATCH 2/2, i386]: Implement TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC

On 3 November 2016 at 18:36, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >>> libfunc, as in "__{,u}divmod{di,ti}4 library function" is already >>> implemented in libgcc. But the enablement of this function inside the >>>

Re: [Patch, rtl] PR middle-end/78016, keep REG_NOTE order during insn copy

> FWIW here's a more complete version of my patch which I'm currently > testing. Let me know if you think it's at least a good enough > intermediate step to be installed. It is, thanks. > I think, the sel-sched example notwithstanding, this is something that > normally should not be needed

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On 2016.11.03 at 14:57 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:55:03PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > On 2016.11.03 at 14:47 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > > I don't have gathered detailed

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Introduce -fsanitize=use-after-scope (v2)

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 03:02:21PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: > > But how would you be able to find out if there isn't any return *ptr; after > > the scope or similar (as MEM_REF)? With is_gimple_reg, they will be turned > > into SSA form and you can easily verify (uses of ASAN_POISON are a

Re: [PATCH 2/2, i386]: Implement TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC

> I guess it can be done. Currently the expander goes: > > --cut here-- > /* Check if optab_handler exists for divmod_optab for given mode. */ > if (optab_handler (tab, mode) != CODE_FOR_nothing) > { > quotient = gen_reg_rtx (mode); > remainder = gen_reg_rtx (mode); >

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Introduce -fsanitize=use-after-scope (v2)

On 11/03/2016 02:44 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > FYI, I think it is much more important to get the initial patch in, so > resolve the switch + declarations inside of its body stuff, add testcases > for that and post for re-review and check in. > These optimizations can be done even in

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:55:03PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2016.11.03 at 14:47 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > I don't have gathered detailed statistics. But for example a simple > > > /* drop through */ in a

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On 2016.11.03 at 14:47 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > I don't have gathered detailed statistics. But for example a simple > > /* drop through */ in a package header file will of course cause many > > bogus warnings during the

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:48:33PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > On 11/03/2016 02:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > >>I don't have gathered detailed statistics. But for example a simple > >>/* drop through */ in a package

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On 11/03/2016 02:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: I don't have gathered detailed statistics. But for example a simple /* drop through */ in a package header file will of course cause many bogus warnings during the build on level

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:57PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > I don't have gathered detailed statistics. But for example a simple > /* drop through */ in a package header file will of course cause many > bogus warnings during the build on level 2. > For the Linux kernel false positives

Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Fix PR77933: stack corruption on ARM when using high registers and lr

Hi, The patch looks correct, however I would suggest to rewrite this bit of the code urgently in separate patch as it is way too complex to assert it is now bug free - there are too many possible failure scenarios to list... Also it generates quite inefficient code - pushable_regs should include

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Introduce -fsanitize=use-after-scope (v2)

Hi! FYI, I think it is much more important to get the initial patch in, so resolve the switch + declarations inside of its body stuff, add testcases for that and post for re-review and check in. These optimizations can be done even in stage3. On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:34:47PM +0100, Martin

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On 2016.11.03 at 14:24 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:55:33PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > On 2016.11.03 at 13:32 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:22:11PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > > > On 11/03/2016 12:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

Re: Implement -Wduplicated-branches (PR c/64279) (v3)

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:27:55AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> > On Tue, Oct 25,

[PATCH, RFC] Improve ivopts group costs

Hello, I'm facing the following problem related to ivopts. The problem is that GCC generates a lot of induction variables and as a result there is an unnecessary increase of stack usage and register pressure. For instance, for the attached testcase (tc_ivopts.c) GCC generates 26 induction

Re: [PATCH, RFC] Introduce -fsanitize=use-after-scope (v2)

On 11/02/2016 03:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 03:38:25PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote: >> it converts: >> foo () >> { >> char a; >> char * p; >> char _1; >> int _2; >> int _8; >> int _9; >> >> : >> ASAN_MARK (2, , 1); >> a = 0; >> p_6 = >> ASAN_MARK (1,

Re: Implement -Wduplicated-branches (PR c/64279) (v3)

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:53:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:41:20AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Marek Polacek wrote: >> > > On

Re: [C++ Patch/RFC] PR 67980 ("left shift count is negative [-Wshift-count-negative] generated for unreachable code")

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Thus, I'm back to one of my first tries earlier today: a much more > conservative change which uses fold_non_dependent_expr only for the purpose > of suppressing the unwanted warnings, see the below. This looks

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:55:33PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2016.11.03 at 13:32 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:22:11PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > > On 11/03/2016 12:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > >On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 12:51:15PM +0100, Bernd

RE: [PATCH] MIPS: If a test in the MIPS testsuite requires standard library support check the sysroot supports the required test options.

> -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches- > ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Bennett > Sent: 03 November 2016 11:33 > To: Matthew Fortune; 'Moore, Catherine'; 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org' > Subject: RE: [PATCH] MIPS: If a test in the MIPS testsuite

Re: [PATCH] Create x.gcov file for binary w/o x.gcda file (PR, gcov-profile/65831)

> On 08/04/2016 02:52 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > > On 08/04/16 08:27, Martin Liška wrote: > >> Hi. > >> > >> Following patch is grabbed from the PR, where I just applied the patch > >> and wrote a test-case which removes x.gcda file before running gcov tool. > >> > >> Ready to be installed? > >

[PATCH, Fortran, v1] Restructure initialization of allocatable components

Hi all, the attached patch restructures gfortran's way of initializing components of derived types in ALLOCATE. The old way was to generate a new gfc_code-node and add it after the ALLOCATE node to initialize the the derived type on certain conditions (like initializer or allocatable components

Re: [PATCH 2/2, i386]: Implement TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> libfunc, as in "__{,u}divmod{di,ti}4 library function" is already >> implemented in libgcc. But the enablement of this function inside the >> compiler has to be performed by each target. > > So can we do it generically

RE: [PATCH,testsuite] MIPS: Downgrade R6 to R5 if tests need branch-likely instructions.

Toma Tabacu writes: > The gcc.target/mips/wrap-delay.c test was failing on mips-img-* > toolchains > because it was using -mbranch-likely with an R6 target, and branch- > likely > instructions were removed in R6. > > This patch makes the testsuite downgrade to R5 if the

Re: [Patch, rtl] PR middle-end/78016, keep REG_NOTE order during insn copy

On 11/03/2016 01:33 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to work through this. Thanks, but since there doesn't seem to be a consensus on the goal, feel free to disregard it and just implement what you need for your initial work. FWIW here's a more complete version of

Re: [PATCH] Convert character arrays to string csts

> On 11/03/2016 01:12 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > >+ tree init = DECL_INITIAL (decl); > >+ if (init > >+ && TREE_READONLY (decl) > >+ && can_convert_ctor_to_string_cst (init)) > >+DECL_INITIAL (decl) = build_string_cst_from_ctor (init); > > I'd merge these two new functions since

Re: [PATCH 2/2, i386]: Implement TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC

> libfunc, as in "__{,u}divmod{di,ti}4 library function" is already > implemented in libgcc. But the enablement of this function inside the > compiler has to be performed by each target. So can we do it generically instead of duplicating it ~50 times? -- Eric Botcazou

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On 2016.11.03 at 13:32 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:22:11PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > On 11/03/2016 12:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > >On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 12:51:15PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > >>I'm concerned about the number of false positives for this

RE: [PATCH,testsuite] MIPS: Downgrade R6 to R5 if tests need branch-likely instructions.

> -Original Message- > From: Toma Tabacu [mailto:toma.tab...@imgtec.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 6:58 AM > Subject: [PATCH,testsuite] MIPS: Downgrade R6 to R5 if tests need > branch-likely instructions. > > > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.target/mips/mips.exp: Add check for

Re: [patch, avr] Make pmem-wrap-around option as default

On 03.11.2016 08:58, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote: Most of the AVR's 8k memorydevices have only rjmp instruction, not jmp. So, it is important to wrap around jump destination to check if it can reach backwards. Currently link specs passes --pmem-wrap-around=xxK when mrelax and mpmem-wrap-around

Re: [PATCH] Convert character arrays to string csts

On 11/03/2016 01:12 PM, Martin Liška wrote: + tree init = DECL_INITIAL (decl); + if (init + && TREE_READONLY (decl) + && can_convert_ctor_to_string_cst (init)) +DECL_INITIAL (decl) = build_string_cst_from_ctor (init); I'd merge these two new functions since they're only ever

Re: [PATCH 2/2, i386]: Implement TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> libfunc is already implemented for all targets to use, there is also: >> >> OPTAB_NC(sdivmod_optab, "divmod$a4", UNKNOWN) >> OPTAB_NC(udivmod_optab, "udivmod$a4", UNKNOWN) >> >> in optabs.def that can probably be

Re: [PATCH] Convert character arrays to string csts

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > Hello. > > This is small follow-up of the patches I sent to string folding. > The patch transforms character array defined in an initializer to string > constant: > > +const char global[] = {'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', '\0'}; > > Apart

Re: [PATCH, vec-tails] Support loop epilogue vectorization

Hi Richard, I did not understand your last remark: > That is, here (and avoid the FOR_EACH_LOOP change): > > @@ -580,12 +586,21 @@ vectorize_loops (void) > && dump_enabled_p ()) > dump_printf_loc (MSG_OPTIMIZED_LOCATIONS, vect_location, >"loop

Re: [Patch, rtl] PR middle-end/78016, keep REG_NOTE order during insn copy

> Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to work through this. Thanks, but since there doesn't seem to be a consensus on the goal, feel free to disregard it and just implement what you need for your initial work. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 01:22:11PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 11/03/2016 12:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 12:51:15PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > >>I'm concerned about the number of false positives for this warning, and > >>judging by previous discussions, I'm not

[PATCH] AIX xcoff declare object name

During Richi's debugging of the section type conflict, he found a problem with rs6000_xcoff_declare_object_name trying to access a decl that did not exist. Fixed thusly. * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_xcoff_declare_object_name): Use symtab_node::get_create. Index: rs6000.c

Re: Change default level for -Wimplicit-fallthrough

On 11/03/2016 12:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 12:51:15PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: I'm concerned about the number of false positives for this warning, and judging by previous discussions, I'm not alone in this. This patch limits it to level 1 (any comment before the

Re: [Patch, rtl] PR middle-end/78016, keep REG_NOTE order during insn copy

On 03/11/16 12:06, Eric Botcazou wrote: What's your decision on this? I think that we ought to standardize on a single order for note copying in the RTL middle-end and the best way to enforce it is to have a single primitive in rtlanal.c, with an optional filtering. Bernd's patch is a step

[PATCH][ARM] Fix ldrd offsets

Fix ldrd offsets of Thumb-2 - for TARGET_LDRD the range is +-1020, without -255..4091. This reduces the number of addressing instructions when using DI mode operations (such as in PR77308). Bootstrap & regress OK. ChangeLog: 2015-11-03 Wilco Dijkstra gcc/ *

Re: [PATCH 2/2, i386]: Implement TARGET_EXPAND_DIVMOD_LIBFUNC

> libfunc is already implemented for all targets to use, there is also: > > OPTAB_NC(sdivmod_optab, "divmod$a4", UNKNOWN) > OPTAB_NC(udivmod_optab, "udivmod$a4", UNKNOWN) > > in optabs.def that can probably be changed for generic expansion. So what's the purpose of ix86_init_libfuncs if the

  1   2   >