Re: [PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

On 12/14/2017 11:48 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: [snip] Thanks, done. I haven't created a new Target-specific developers options table but instead listed the targets the options apply to in parentheses. Attached is the latest iteration. Thank you for the review, Kyrill 2017-12-14  Kyrylo

Re: [PATCH][i386,AVX] Enable VAES support [5/5]

Hello Julioa, On 08 Nov 12:44, Koval, Julia wrote: > Hi, this patch enables VAESENC instruction from VAES isaset, defined here: > https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/c5/15/architecture-instruction-set-extensions-programming-reference.pdf > > Ok for trunk? Your patch is OK.

Re: [PATCH][i386,AVX] Enable VAES support [4/5]

Hello Julia, On 08 Nov 12:42, Koval, Julia wrote: > Hi, this patch enables VAESENC instruction from VAES isaset, defined here: > https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/c5/15/architecture-instruction-set-extensions-programming-reference.pdf > > Ok for trunk? Your patch is OK. I've

[PATCH, libgcc] Fix PowerPC libgcc issues with -mabi=ieeelongdouble

I am working on some patches to optionally enable multilibs for the PowerPC long double support to be switchable between IBM extended double and IEEE 128-bit floating point. While the patches to actually enable the multlibs need some more tweaking, it did point up an issue in the libgcc _Float128

Re: [PATCH][i386,AVX] Enable VAES support [3/5]

Hello Julia, On 08 Nov 12:38, Koval, Julia wrote: > Patch attached. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Koval, Julia > > Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 1:38 PM > > To: 'GCC Patches' > > Cc: 'Kirill Yukhin' > > Subject:

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Follow-on fix for PR target/80210: ICE in extract_insn

On 10/2/17 12:10 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 12:00:55PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: >> On 9/29/17 5:31 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>> Looks great to me, please commit. But hold off until Monday please, it >>> will interfere with testing otherwise. >> >> Ok,

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add support to __builtin_cpu_supports() for new HWCAP2 bit

On 11/7/17 11:05 AM, Peter Bergner wrote: > On 11/7/17 7:12 AM, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho wrote: >> That's the same string adopted in glibc. [1] >> PPC_FEATURE2_HTM_NO_SUSPEND is also user-visible in glibc as a macro and is >> identical too. >> >> Notice this has not been merged into Linus

Re: [001/nnn] poly_int: add poly-int.h

On 12/07/2017 03:48 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/07/2017 03:38 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: So I think that's the final ack on this series. Thanks to both of you, really appreciate it! Sorry it took so long. Richard S. can you confirm? I fully expect the trunk has moved some and the

Re: [PATCH] have -Wnonnull print inlining stack (PR 83369)

On 12/14/2017 06:53 PM, David Malcolm wrote: On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 16:07 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/14/2017 12:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/11/2017 03:18 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/11/2017 02:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote: On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Dec 14, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Dec 14, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> I'll arrange for markers to be moved past labels, even in gimple > Here's a patch that implements this, and reverts all the changes I could > find that had been introduced to

Re: [PATCH] have -Wnonnull print inlining stack (PR 83369)

On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 16:07 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 12/14/2017 12:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 12/11/2017 03:18 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > On 12/11/2017 02:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > > > > > Bug 83369 - Missing

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Dec 14, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > I'll arrange for markers to be moved past labels, even in gimple Here's a patch that implements this, and reverts all the changes I could find that had been introduced to support debug markers before labels and between BBs. I have

Re: [005/nnn] poly_int: rtx constants

Jeff Law writes: > On 10/23/2017 11:00 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> This patch adds an rtl representation of poly_int values. >> There were three possible ways of doing this: >> >> (1) Add a new rtl code for the poly_ints themselves and store the >> coefficients as

Re: [002/nnn] poly_int: IN_TARGET_CODE

Jeff Law writes: > On 10/23/2017 10:58 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> This patch makes each target-specific TU define an IN_TARGET_CODE macro, >> which is used to decide whether poly_int<1, C> should convert to C. >> >> >> 2017-10-23 Richard Sandiford

Re: [14/nn] Add helpers for shift count modes

Richard Biener writes: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> Richard Biener writes: >>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Richard Biener >>> wrote:

Re: [06/nn] Add VEC_SERIES_{CST,EXPR} and associated optab

Similarly to the update 05 patch, this patch just adds VEC_SERIES_EXPR, since the VEC_SERIES_CST isn't needed with the new VECTOR_CST layout. build_vec_series now uses the new VECTOR_CST layout, but otherwise this is just the original patch with bits removed. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu,

Re: [05/nn] Add VEC_DUPLICATE_{CST,EXPR} and associated optab

This patch just adds VEC_DUPLICATE_EXPR, since the VEC_DUPLICATE_CST isn't needed with the new VECTOR_CST layout. It's really just the original patch with bits removed, but just in case: Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, x86_64-linux-gnu and powerpc64-linux-gnu. OK to install? Richard 2017-12-15

Re: Add an "early rematerialisation" pass

Richard Biener writes: > On December 14, 2017 8:26:49 PM GMT+01:00, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >>Jeff Law writes: >>> On 12/14/2017 04:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Richard Sandiford

Re: [PATCH] have -Wnonnull print inlining stack (PR 83369)

On 12/14/2017 12:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/11/2017 03:18 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/11/2017 02:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote: On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug 83369 - Missing diagnostics during inlining, notes that when -Wnonnull is issued for an inlined call to a

Re: [PATCH] make canonicalize_condition keep its promise

On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 13:43 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/21/2017 10:45 AM, Aaron Sawdey wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:06 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On 11/20/2017 06:41 AM, Aaron Sawdey wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2017-11-19 at 16:44 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > On 11/15/2017 08:40 AM,

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/83279 handle sendfile not copying entire file

I failed to notice that the man page for sendfile(3) says it won't copy more than 2GiB. This refactors the code to first try sendfile (because it's fast if it works) and if that fails, or stops before the end of the file, then use filebufs to copy what's left over. I'm not adding a test because

Re: [PATCH][GCC][ARM] Fix fragile arm fpu attribute tests.

On 14 December 2017 at 11:56, Tamar Christina wrote: > The 12/13/2017 08:49, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> On 12 December 2017 at 18:29, Tamar Christina >> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > The previous test made use of arm_neon.h which made the whole

Re: [PATCH][Middle-end]2nd patch of PR78809 and PR83026

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 01:45:21PM -0600, Qing Zhao wrote: > 2017-12-11 Qing Zhao > No " " in ChangeLog entries please. > --- a/gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c > +++ b/gcc/tree-ssa-strlen.c > @@ -2541,6 +2541,198 @@

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/68519 use native duration to avoid rounding errors

The result of system_clock::now() + duration(1) is a duration with the same value as now(), due to the limited precision of float. This patch converts the duration to system_clock::duration before doing the sum, so that we don't lose precision. PR libstdc++/68519 *

Re: [wwwdocs] mention AVR additions

Hi Johann, On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: This adds AVR improvements to v8 Release Notes. that's quite impressive a set of improvements! Index: changes.html === The new devices are filed under

Re: [PATCH] make canonicalize_condition keep its promise

On 11/21/2017 10:45 AM, Aaron Sawdey wrote: > On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 10:06 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 11/20/2017 06:41 AM, Aaron Sawdey wrote: >>> On Sun, 2017-11-19 at 16:44 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/15/2017 08:40 AM, Aaron Sawdey wrote: > So, the story of this very small patch

[committed] Small formatting fix

Hi! While looking into PR83422 I've noticed this formatting glitch, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, committed to trunk as obvious. 2017-12-14 Jakub Jelinek * var-tracking.c (variable_tracking_main_1): Formatting fix. --- gcc/var-tracking.c.jj

[PATCH] Fix (-A) - B -> (-B) - A optimization in fold_binary_loc (PR tree-optimization/83269)

Hi! As the following testcase shows, the (-A) - B -> (-B) - A optimization can't be done the way it is if the negation of A is performed in type with wrapping behavior while the subtraction is done in signed type (with the same precision), as if A is (unsigned) INT_MIN, then (int) -(unsigned)

[PATCH] Fix -fcompare-debug due to DEBUG_BEGIN_STMTs (PR debug/83419)

Hi! The following testcase FAILs -fcompare-debug, because one COND_EXPR branch from the FE during gimplifications is just > which doesn't have TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS, but for -gstatement-frontiers it is a STATEMENT_LIST which contains # DEBUG BEGIN_STMT and that >. Neither # DEBUG BEGIN_STMT nor that

Re: [PATCH][Middle-end]79538 missing -Wformat-overflow with %s and non-member array arguments

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 1:36 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 12/14/2017 12:22 PM, Qing Zhao wrote: >> >>> On Dec 14, 2017, at 2:05 AM, Richard Biener >> > wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Qing Zhao wrote: >>> Hi, I

[PATCH][Middle-end]2nd patch of PR78809 and PR83026

Hi, I am not sure whether it’s proper to send this patch during this late stage. however, since the patch itself is quite straightforward, I decided to send it now. = 2nd Patch for PR78009 Patch for PR83026 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78809

Re: [PATCH][Middle-end]79538 missing -Wformat-overflow with %s and non-member array arguments

On 12/14/2017 12:22 PM, Qing Zhao wrote: > >> On Dec 14, 2017, at 2:05 AM, Richard Biener > > wrote: >> >> On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Qing Zhao wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I updated gimple-fold.c as you suggested, bootstrapped and re-tested >>> on both x86

Re: [PATCH] Slight cost adjustment in SLSR

On December 14, 2017 8:12:36 PM GMT+01:00, Bill Schmidt wrote: >Hi, > >While looking at PR83253, I noticed that the cost model for MULT_EXPR >replacement can be improved. Right now we use mult_by_coeff_cost to >determine the value of the possible replacement, but we

Re: [PATCH] have -Wnonnull print inlining stack (PR 83369)

On 12/11/2017 09:51 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: > Bug 83369 - Missing diagnostics during inlining, notes that when > -Wnonnull is issued for an inlined call to a built-in function, > GCC doesn't print the inlining stack, making it hard to debug > where the problem comes from. > > When the -Wnonnull

Re: Add an "early rematerialisation" pass

On December 14, 2017 8:26:49 PM GMT+01:00, Richard Sandiford wrote: >Jeff Law writes: >> On 12/14/2017 04:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Richard Sandiford >>> wrote: This patch

[PR C++/59930] template friend classes & default args

PR 59930 concerns some problems with templated friend classes (of templates). In rying to clean up our handling, I discovered we were accepting default args of such things. This is ill formed [temp.param]/12 'A default template-argument shall not be specified in a friend class template

Re: [PATCH] have -Wnonnull print inlining stack (PR 83369)

On 12/11/2017 06:16 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 15:18 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: >> On 12/11/2017 02:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >>> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug 83369 - Missing diagnostics during inlining, notes that when -Wnonnull is

Re: Add an "early rematerialisation" pass

Jeff Law writes: > On 12/14/2017 04:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Richard Sandiford >> wrote: >>> This patch looks for pseudo registers that are live across a call >>> and for which no call-preserved hard registers

Re: [PATCH 03/14] C++: add location_t wrapper nodes during parsing (minimal impl)

On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 21:10 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 11/10/2017 04:45 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > The initial version of the patch kit added location wrapper nodes > > around constants and uses-of-declarations, along with some other > > places in the parser (typeid, alignof, sizeof,

Re: [PATCH] have -Wnonnull print inlining stack (PR 83369)

On 12/11/2017 03:18 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > On 12/11/2017 02:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: >>> Bug 83369 - Missing diagnostics during inlining, notes that when >>> -Wnonnull is issued for an inlined call to a built-in function, >>> GCC

Re: [PATCH][Middle-end]79538 missing -Wformat-overflow with %s and non-member array arguments

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 2:05 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Qing Zhao wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I updated gimple-fold.c as you suggested, bootstrapped and re-tested on both >> x86 and aarch64. no any issue. >> >> >> diff --git a/gcc/gimple-fold.c

Re: [PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

On 14/12/17 18:48, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: On 14/12/17 18:23, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 12/14/2017 10:56 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: >> >> 2017-12-14 Kyrylo Tkachov >> >> * doc/invoke.texi (GCC Developer options): Add Target-specific >> developer options

[PATCH] Slight cost adjustment in SLSR

Hi, While looking at PR83253, I noticed that the cost model for MULT_EXPR replacement can be improved. Right now we use mult_by_coeff_cost to determine the value of the possible replacement, but we use mul_cost to determine the savings from removing the original expression. This overcounts the

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On 12/14/2017 11:55 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:51:26AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: >>> Well, it would be nice to get sanitizers diagnose this at runtime. If we >>> know the array length at compile time, simply compare after the strlen >>> call the result and fail if it

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 11:51:26AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > > Well, it would be nice to get sanitizers diagnose this at runtime. If we > > know the array length at compile time, simply compare after the strlen > > call the result and fail if it returns something above it. Or replace > > the

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On 12/14/2017 09:18 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:13:21AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: Although I would prefer not to, I suppose if letting strlen cross the boundaries of subobjects was considered an important use to accommodate in limited cases the optimization could be

Re: [PATCHv3] Add a warning for invalid function casts

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 12/06/17 23:35, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Bernd Edlinger >> wrote: >>> this version of the patch improves the heuristic check to take the >>> target hook

Re: [PR59319] output friends in debug info

On 12/07/2017 04:04 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Apr 7, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Mar 21, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Jan 27, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Oct 19, 2016, Alexandre Oliva wrote: On

Re: [PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

On 14/12/17 18:23, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 12/14/2017 10:56 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: 2017-12-14 Kyrylo Tkachov * doc/invoke.texi (GCC Developer options): Add Target-specific developer options subsection. Populate it with AArch64 and ARM options.

Re: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr

On Dec 14, 2017, "Tsimbalist, Igor V" wrote: >> Regstrapping with -fcompare-debug on stage3 host and target builds on >> x86_64- and i686-linux-gnu; ok to install? > Ok from me. Thanks, I went ahead and installed it. > Am I correct the error you had was related to

Re: [PATCHv3] Add a warning for invalid function casts

On 12/07/17 21:48, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 12/06/17 23:35, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Bernd Edlinger >> wrote: >>> this version of the patch improves the heuristic check to take the >>> target hook into account, to handle cases correctly

Re: [PATCH][ARM][gcc-7] Fix regression on soft float targets for armv8_2-fp16-move-2.c

On 14/12/17 18:17, Sudi Das wrote: Hi On 14/12/17 17:37, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 14 December 2017 at 17:05, Sudakshina Das wrote: >> Hi >> >> This patch is a follow up on my previous patch with r255536 that was a >> back-port for fixing a wrong code generation >>

Re: [SFN+LVU+IEPM v4 1/9] [SFN] adjust RTL insn-walking API

On Dec 14, 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:55:30AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> for gcc/ChangeLog > Please fix up formatting. Otherwise LGTM. Thanks, here's what I ended up installing (formatting fixes were slightly different from what you

Re: [PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

On 12/14/2017 10:56 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: 2017-12-14  Kyrylo Tkachov      * doc/invoke.texi (GCC Developer options): Add Target-specific     developer options subsection.  Populate it with AArch64 and ARM     options. > diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi

Re: [PATCH][ARM][gcc-7] Fix regression on soft float targets for armv8_2-fp16-move-2.c

Hi On 14/12/17 17:37, Christophe Lyon wrote: On 14 December 2017 at 17:05, Sudakshina Das wrote: Hi This patch is a follow up on my previous patch with r255536 that was a back-port for fixing a wrong code generation

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 04:08:45PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Dec 13, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > > On Dec 12, 2017, David Edelsohn wrote: > >> Rainer, > >> PR83396 opened. you can add Solaris to the list of targets. > > > Andreas, > > >

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Dec 13, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Dec 12, 2017, David Edelsohn wrote: >> Rainer, >> PR83396 opened. you can add Solaris to the list of targets. > Andreas, > Here's a fix for the ia64 regression you mentioned in that PR. And here's a patch

Re: [PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

Hi Sandra, On 14/12/17 17:09, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 12/14/2017 08:53 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, This patch adds an -mverbose-cost-dump option, similar to the one in aarch64. It makes the RTX cost dump print the RTX we're costing in the backend, as well as its cost. This can be

Re: [Patch][Aarch64] Fix aarch64 libatomic build with older binutils

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 11:56:55PM +, Steve Ellcey wrote: > James, > > Here is a patch that will turn off the use of IFUNC and the LSE > instructions in libatomic if the compiler/assembler toolchain do not > understand the '-march=armv8-a+lse' option (changed from > -march=armv8.1-a).  Rather

Re: [PATCH][ARM][gcc-7] Fix regression on soft float targets for armv8_2-fp16-move-2.c

On 14 December 2017 at 17:05, Sudakshina Das wrote: > Hi > > This patch is a follow up on my previous patch with r255536 that was a > back-port for fixing a wrong code generation > (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg02209.html). > As pointed out by Christophe Lyon >

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/83427 detect weak result type from noexcept functions

On 14/12/17 17:29 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Richard Smith pointed out that our "weak result type" implementation (used by std::reference_wrapper and std::bind) doesn't work for noexcept functions. The simple fix is to adjust every partial specialization to include noexcept deduction (which

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/83427 detect weak result type from noexcept functions

Richard Smith pointed out that our "weak result type" implementation (used by std::reference_wrapper and std::bind) doesn't work for noexcept functions. The simple fix is to adjust every partial specialization to include noexcept deduction (which I'll do for gcc-7-branch), but I took the

[committed] v3: vrp_prop: Use dom_walker for -Warray-bounds (PR tree-optimization/83312)

On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 11:53 +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:30 PM, David Malcolm > wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 10:47 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On 12/13/2017 09:24 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Alternately we could to the

[Ada] Minor tweak to default_pass_by_ref

Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2017-12-14 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/misc.c (default_pass_by_ref): Minor tweak. -- Eric BotcazouIndex: gcc-interface/misc.c === ---

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR83418

On December 14, 2017 4:43:42 PM GMT+01:00, Jeff Law wrote: >On 12/14/2017 01:54 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> IVOPTs (at least) leaves unfolded stmts in the IL and VRP >overzealously >> asserts they cannot happen. >> >> Bootstrap and regtest running on

[Ada] Fix compilation time explosion due to recursive inlining

This clears DECL_DISREGARD_INLINE_LIMITS on recursive expression functions. Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline. 2017-12-14 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/trans.c (Call_to): Set DECL_DISREGARD_INLINE_LIMITS to 0 on the callee if the

Re: [PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

On 12/14/2017 08:53 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi all, This patch adds an -mverbose-cost-dump option, similar to the one in aarch64. It makes the RTX cost dump print the RTX we're costing in the backend, as well as its cost. This can be distracting in other cost-related RTL dumps like

[Ada] Fix misalignment in record with aliased field and rep clause

This is a regression present on all actives branches: the compiler doesn't correctly align a field in a record type if there is a partial representation clause on this record type that does not cover the field, but covers another field which is aliased (or contains an aliased subcomponent) and

Re: patch to fix PR82353

On 12/13/2017 07:34 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: On 10/16/2017 10:38 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: This is another version of the patch to fix     https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82353 The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86-64 with Go and Ada. Committed as rev. 253796. Hi

Re: [RFC] Add means to split dump file into several files -- Use in lra

On 12/07/2017 09:53 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: Hi, I'm currently debugging a problem in lra, and got a bit lost in the 20k+ lines dump file. I observed that: - the lra dump file is one of the biggest ones - lra itself consists of a looping of sub-passes. So, I've: - written a dump

Re: [AARCH64] Neon vld1_*_x3, vst1_*_x2 and vst1_*_x3 intrinsics

2017-12-14 9:29 GMT+01:00 Sameera Deshpande : > Hi! > > Please find attached the patch implementing vld1_*_x3, vst1_*_x2 and > vst1_*_x3 intrinsics as defined by Neon document. > > Ok for trunk? > > - Thanks and regards, > Sameera D. > > gcc/Changelog: > >

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:13:21AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > Although I would prefer not to, I suppose if letting strlen cross > > the boundaries of subobjects was considered an important use to > > accommodate in limited cases the optimization could be disabled > > for member arrays declared

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On 12/12/2017 08:47 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: >> >> struct fu { >>   char x1[10]; >>   char x2[10]; >>   int avoid_trailing_array; >> } >> >> Where objects stored in x1 are not null terminated.  Are we in the realm >> of undefined behavior at that point (I hope so)? > > Yes, this is undefined. 

[PATCH][ARM][gcc-7] Fix regression on soft float targets for armv8_2-fp16-move-2.c

Hi This patch is a follow up on my previous patch with r255536 that was a back-port for fixing a wrong code generation (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg02209.html). As pointed out by Christophe Lyon (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00718.html) the test case

Re: [PATCH] set range for strlen(array) to avoid spurious -Wstringop-overflow (PR 83373 , PR 78450)

On 12/14/2017 03:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 4:47 AM, Martin Sebor wrote: On 12/12/2017 05:35 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 12/12/2017 01:15 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: Bug 83373 - False positive reported by -Wstringop-overflow, is another example of warning

Re: Add an "early rematerialisation" pass

On 12/14/2017 04:09 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >> This patch looks for pseudo registers that are live across a call >> and for which no call-preserved hard registers exist. It then >> recomputes the

[PATCH][arm] Add -mverbose-cost-dump and de-verbosify cost dumps

Hi all, This patch adds an -mverbose-cost-dump option, similar to the one in aarch64. It makes the RTX cost dump print the RTX we're costing in the backend, as well as its cost. This can be distracting in other cost-related RTL dumps like combine's. So now we don't dump the backend

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR83418

On 12/14/2017 01:54 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > IVOPTs (at least) leaves unfolded stmts in the IL and VRP overzealously > asserts they cannot happen. > > Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. > > Richard. > > 2017-12-14 Richard Biener > > PR

[committed] Testcase for PR lto/81406

Hi! This got fixed by r251220. Testcase tested on x86_64-linux, trunk as well as r251218 (where it FAILs), committed to trunk as obvious. 2017-12-14 Jakub Jelinek PR lto/81406 * gcc.dg/lto/pr81406_0.c: New test. --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr81406_0.c.jj

[PATCH] Testcase for PR66974

Committed. 2017-12-14 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/66974 * gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-24.c: New testcase. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-24.c === ---

Re: [testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

On 12/14/2017 03:18 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Jakub, On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 03:09:02PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: On 12/14/2017 02:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:40:12PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c +++

[PATCH] Testcase for fixed PR65258

Committed. Richard. 2017-12-14 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/65258 * gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-23.c: New testcase. Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Warray-bounds-23.c === ---

[PATCH] Fix PR67842

The PR says just remove the #if 0 code. Done below, committed as obvious. Richard. 2017-12-14 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/67842 * sese.h (bb_in_region): Remove #if 0'ed code. Index: gcc/sese.h

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 03:41:24PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > This fixes the m68k ICE. > > Andreas. > > PR bootstrap/83396 > * reload1.c (emit_input_reload_insns): Skip debug markers. This is ok for trunk, thanks. > --- a/gcc/reload1.c > +++ b/gcc/reload1.c > @@ -7345,12

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

This fixes the m68k ICE. Andreas. PR bootstrap/83396 * reload1.c (emit_input_reload_insns): Skip debug markers. --- gcc/reload1.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/reload1.c b/gcc/reload1.c index fe1ec0d011..baedc43b75 100644 ---

Re: [testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

Hi Jakub, > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 03:09:02PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: >> On 12/14/2017 02:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:40:12PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: >> > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c >> > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c >> > >

Re: [testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

Hi Tom, > this patch introduces an effective target weak_undefined, and uses it in > test-case visibility-22.c. > > I've tested this on trunk for x86_64, and the test still runs and passes. > > I've tested this on an internal branch for the gcn target, where it makes > the test unsupported

Re: [testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 03:09:02PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/14/2017 02:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:40:12PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > > > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c > > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c > > > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ > >

Re: [testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

On 12/14/2017 02:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:40:12PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ /* PR target/32219 */ /* { dg-do run } */ /* { dg-require-visibility "" } */ +/*

Re: [testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:40:12PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/visibility-22.c > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ > /* PR target/32219 */ > /* { dg-do run } */ > /* { dg-require-visibility "" } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target

[testsuite] Require effective target weak_undefined for visibility-22.c

Hi, this patch introduces an effective target weak_undefined, and uses it in test-case visibility-22.c. I've tested this on trunk for x86_64, and the test still runs and passes. I've tested this on an internal branch for the gcn target, where it makes the test unsupported (instead of timing

Re: [PATCH GCC]More conservative interchanging small loops with const initialized simple reduction

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Richard Biener >>>

RE: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr

> -Original Message- > From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:aol...@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 8:34 AM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Tsimbalist, Igor V > Subject: [compare-debug] use call loc for nop_endbr > > We skip debug insns and notes

Re: [SFN+LVU+IEPM v4 1/9] [SFN] adjust RTL insn-walking API

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:55:30AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > for gcc/ChangeLog > > PR bootstrap/83396 > * config/arc/arc.c (hwloop_optimize): Skip debug insns. > * config/sh/sh-protos.h (sh_find_set_of_reg): Adjust. > * config/sh/sh.c: Skip debug insns besides

Re: [SFN+LVU+IEPM v4 1/9] [SFN] adjust RTL insn-walking API

On Dec 12, 2017, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Dec 7, 2017, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 11/09/2017 07:34 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >>> (prev_nonnote_insn_bb, next_nonnote_insn_bb): Remove. > Thanks, FTR, here it is, as installed: On Aug 31, 2017, Alexandre Oliva

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/59568 fix error handling for std::complex stream extraction

On 14/12/17 11:28 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 13/12/17 18:42 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: The bug here is that we called putback even if the initial __is >> __ch extraction failed and set eofbit, and putback clears the eofbit. I found a number of other problems though, such as not even

[Ada] Fix discrepancy in annotated vs computed sizes

This fixes the discrepancy present in annotated vs computed sizes for objects either directly subject to an alignment clause or of a type itself subject to an alignment clause. In the former case, the annotated size can be wrong whereas the computed size can be wrong in the latter case.

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/59568 fix error handling for std::complex stream extraction

On 13/12/17 18:42 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: The bug here is that we called putback even if the initial __is >> __ch extraction failed and set eofbit, and putback clears the eofbit. I found a number of other problems though, such as not even trying to call putback after failing to find the

Re: Add an "early rematerialisation" pass

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > This patch looks for pseudo registers that are live across a call > and for which no call-preserved hard registers exist. It then > recomputes the pseudos as necessary to ensure that they are no > longer

Re: [SFN] Bootstrap broken

On Dec 13, 2017, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > In particular, this testcase is using selective scheduling, therefore > we turn off -fvar-tracking-assignments, but the debug stmt markers are > emitted anyway. *nod*, that much was intended (though I could be convinced to change it ;-)

  1   2   >