My comment is(was) not on the format of the patch. Instead, I am
thinking whether Android toolchain customer, which is Android AOSP,
wants this patch.
I don't know the scenario behind this patch. I think the question
behind this patch is, if RTTI and exceptions are enabled by default,
who
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 10:34 -0600, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 02/24/12 07:10, Torvald Riegel wrote:
safety. I didn't have time to look at Aldy's patch yet, but a first
safe and conservative way would be to treat transactions as full
transformation barriers, and prevent
We probably want to do some nop'ish thing here which will yield the
cpu thread on Niagara cpus, I'd recommend something along the lines of
rd %ccr, %g0 or rd %y, %g0
libgomp has its own idea about cpu_relax:
static inline void
cpu_relax (void)
{
#if defined __arch64__ || defined __sparc_v9__
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Torvald Riegel trie...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 10:34 -0600, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
On 02/24/12 07:10, Torvald Riegel wrote:
safety. I didn't have time to look at Aldy's patch yet, but a first
safe and conservative way would be to treat
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 01:33:08PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
This problem affects trunk and the 4.6 and 4.5 branches. 4.4 is not
affected since it doesn't have these man pages.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg01187.html for a
similar problem in libquadmath that Joseph
2012-01-27 Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
* gcc-interface/decl.c (gnat_to_gnu_entity) object: For an aliased
object with an unconstrained nominal subtype and if optimization isn't
enabled, create a special VAR_DECL for debugging purposes.
Unfortunately this isn't
This is a regression present on the mainline. The compiler generates wrong
code for the assignment to an object of an aggregate that contains a component
which overlaps with the object, if the object's type is a record type which
contains at least two nested levels of discriminated record type
Status
==
The trunk is still in regression and documentation fixes only state
(so-called stage4).
We have reached a point where it is sufficiently stable for a first
release candidate. If there appear no serious release blockers in
the next few days expect a release candidate this week.
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:07:39PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
The following patch has remained unreviewed for a week:
[v3, libgomp, build] Fix Solaris symbol versioning (PR libstdc++/52188)
Hi,
Jakub Jelinekja...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:07:39PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
The following patch has remained unreviewed for a week:
[v3, libgomp, build] Fix Solaris symbol versioning (PR libstdc++/52188)
Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com writes:
Jakub Jelinekja...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:07:39PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
The following patch has remained unreviewed for a week:
[v3, libgomp, build] Fix Solaris symbol versioning (PR libstdc++/52188)
Hello!
We should not use e constraint for QI/HImode immediates. Fixed by
using correct mode attribute.
2012-02-27 Uros Bizjak ubiz...@gmail.com
* config/i386/i386.md (*movabsmode_1): Fix operand 1 constraints.
Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu {,-m32}, committed to mainline SVN.
Uros.
On 02/27/2012 02:38 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
While the mechanism introduced is generic, it currently affects
Solaris only. And yes, I've compared versioning in libstdc++.so and
libgomp.so on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu without and with the patch as
described in the submission: no change.
Undef TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS and define TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS
in linux.h with GNU_USER_TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS and
ANDROID_TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS.
--
H.J.
Hello,
Here is a variant with linux.h modification. Does it look fine?
Thanks,
Ilya
--
2012-02-27 Enkovich Ilya
Hi!
One missing spot where clobber stmts need to be ignored.
Testcase needs profile feedback and is quite large, so not
adding it to testsuite; bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux
and i686-linux, approved by richi in the PR, committed to trunk.
2012-02-27 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
Hi!
We ICE shortly after expansion on this testcase, because
vlshrv4si3 expander is called with a SUBREG as operands[2],
but we were testing just for REG_P, and in the other branch
we assume that it is an immediate. But there is no right shift
with register shift count.
Fixed thusly,
Hi!
Apparently after I've updated baseline_symbols.txt
files for a couple of targets Jonathan added some extra
exported symbols. This patch adds them.
Ok for trunk?
2012-02-27 Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
* config/abi/post/i386-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt: Update.
*
On 27 February 2012 15:18, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
Apparently after I've updated baseline_symbols.txt
files for a couple of targets Jonathan added some extra
exported symbols. This patch adds them.
Ok for trunk?
OK - thanks.
On 27/02/12 15:12, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
We ICE shortly after expansion on this testcase, because
vlshrv4si3 expander is called with a SUBREG as operands[2],
but we were testing just for REG_P, and in the other branch
we assume that it is an immediate. But there is no right shift
with
Hello,
two new testcases were failing on SPU for the usual reasons:
- gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_9.f03 tries to allocate too much memory
- gcc.dg/torture/builtin-complex-1.c assumes IEEE semantics (Inf/Nan),
which isn't supported for single-precision float on SPU
The following patch fixes
This makes the patch for PR50444 less conservative by also looking
at TYPE_ALIGN of the base we offset. I guess we do not need to
worry about the '???' as IPA SRA uses sth different (see PR52402)
and the only case I definitely see only creates an address of the
generated access.
Bootstrapped
This fixes PR52402 in a similar way as PR50444. IPA SRA needs to be
careful about alignment when constructing accesses.
Bootstrap and regtest pending on x86_64, any comments?
Thanks,
Richard.
2012-02-27 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR tree-optimization/52402
*
This fixes PR52400 - we cannot register renamed decl mappings when
we can have name duplicates. Which we trivially can have with
local fn decls. At least the reverse mapping should no longer be
necessary as the alias pair handling has been rewritten to work
on the cgraph level.
Bootstrapped on
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Kai Tietz wrote:
2012-02-27 Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com
* soft-fp/quad.h: Mark bitfield-structures as gcc_struct.
Regression tested for i686-w64-mingw32, x86_64-w64-mingw32, and
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for all languages (including Ada + Obj-C++).
Ok for
Again, __transactions being barriers and all, I don't think we should
complicate things unnecessarily at this point, since it doesn't happen.
Yes. Based on Richard Guenther's examples, my question was whether your
code (without having actually looked at it ;) ) would also allow
2012/2/27 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
As explained in codingconventions.html, soft-fp is imported from glibc.
For files that come from glibc, you can only copy in the glibc versions,
unchanged.
Ok, thanks for explaination.
Thus, you should submit this fix to libc-alpha. You'll
Ok. I see. So, I think what would be best is to have a way to check whether
a store/load is part of a transaction - do we have a way to do that right now?
(For example a flag on a gimple stmt?) Then we can simply avoid the LIM
We do not (*). My patch accumulates that information on demand.
For that matter, didn't rth add a memory barrier at the beginning of
transactions last week? That would mean that we can't hoist anything
outside of a transaction anyhow. Or was it not a full memory barrier?
It's now a full memory barrier for all global memory and for local statics
if their
Currently the testsuite/boehm-gc.c/thread_leak_test.c executation test
will hang on several targets including x86_64-apple-darwin10/11 for -m32/-m64.
The attached patch eliminates this issue, PR48299, by merging in the
upstream changes for this testcase from...
On 02/27/2012 11:22 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Ok. I see. So, I think what would be best is to have a way to check
whether
a store/load is part of a transaction - do we have a way to do that
right now?
(For example a flag on a gimple stmt?) Then we can simply avoid the LIM
We do not (*).
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Kai Tietz wrote:
For gcc_struct variant bitfields with different types get merged
together, but for ms_struct bitfields are getting merged together
only, if they have same type. As in those structures - I modified in
this patch - we have varying types for bitfields,
Hi,
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
For that matter, didn't rth add a memory barrier at the beginning of
transactions last week? That would mean that we can't hoist anything
outside of a transaction anyhow. Or was it not a full memory barrier?
It's now a full memory
2012/2/27 Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Kai Tietz wrote:
For gcc_struct variant bitfields with different types get merged
together, but for ms_struct bitfields are getting merged together
only, if they have same type. As in those structures - I modified in
So here is the libgcc patch only.
ChangeLog gcc's libgcc
2012-02-28 Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com
* config/i386/sfp-machine.h (_FP_STRUCT_LAYOUT): Define it
for mingw-targets as attribute gcc_struct.
Ok for apply?
Regards,
Kai
Index: config/i386/sfp-machine.h
This is a regression present on the mainline. The compiler generates very
large data if a variable whose type is an access to an unconstrained array is
initialized with a constant object declaration whose expression is null. The
assembler may issue a warning on the construct.
Tested on
On 02/27/12 11:02, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
For that matter, didn't rth add a memory barrier at the beginning of
transactions last week? That would mean that we can't hoist anything
outside of a transaction anyhow. Or was it not a full memory
The 4.7 compiler introduces the DW_AT_GNAT_descriptive_type attribute for Ada:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-02/msg01194.html
We just realized that the way it is current generated may lead to incomplete
debug info because it is generated before the children of the DIE, for example
the
On Feb 26, 2012, at 11:21 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
this patch fixes various testsuite failures in gcc.target/i386 for
mingw targets.
Ok for apply?
Ok. [ any extra eyes that can spot any small detail I miss are always welcome ]
On Feb 27, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Currently the testsuite/boehm-gc.c/thread_leak_test.c executation test
will hang on several targets including x86_64-apple-darwin10/11 for -m32/-m64.
The attached patch eliminates this issue, PR48299, by merging in the
upstream changes for this
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com wrote:
My comment is(was) not on the format of the patch. Instead, I am
thinking whether Android toolchain customer, which is Android AOSP,
wants this patch.
I don't know the scenario behind this patch. I think the
From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer bernhard.reutner-fisc...@univie.ac.at
gcc/ChangeLog:
2010-01-03 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer al...@gcc.gnu.org
* gcc.c (display_help): Document --help=common and sort entries
alphabetically.
Signed-off-by: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer bernhard.reutner-fisc...@univie.ac.at
gcc/ChangeLog:
2009-07-29 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer al...@gcc.gnu.org
* gcc/doc/install.texi: Document check-$LANG specific shortcuts
Signed-off-by: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer bernhard.reutner-fisc...@univie.ac.at
---
On Feb 27, 2012, at 10:22 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer bernhard.reutner-fisc...@univie.ac.at
gcc/ChangeLog:
2009-07-29 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer al...@gcc.gnu.org
* gcc/doc/install.texi: Document check-$LANG specific shortcuts
Ok, thanks.
From: Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:42:17 +0100
We probably want to do some nop'ish thing here which will yield the
cpu thread on Niagara cpus, I'd recommend something along the lines of
rd %ccr, %g0 or rd %y, %g0
libgomp has its own idea about cpu_relax:
Hello,
On Monday 13 February 2012 23:38:57 Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
Mikael,
This is OK for trunk with one proviso; could you move
is_class_container_ref to gfc_is_class_container_ref in class.c?
Thanks for the patch
I have a small hardware issue (overheating) preventing me from
On Tuesday 21 February 2012 16:55:09 Tobias Burnus wrote:
Build and regtested on x86-64-linux.
OK for the 4.8 trunk?
OK.
Mikael
PS: I think that, in general, we should _accept_ statements on MATCH_ERROR to
avoid issues of this kind.
On Saturday 18 February 2012 14:33:09 Tobias Burnus wrote:
The patch consists of two parts:
* The pointer check in gfc_check_vardef_context didn't honour
polymorphic variables
* Passing a TYPE to a CLASS is not allowed if CLASS is a pointer or
allocatable as the actual argument cannot
This patch fixed PR 52373, which is a segfault or rtl checking failure
(depending on how lucky you are) on mips-sgi-irix6.5. I can't reproduce
it on *-elf or *-linux-gnu, probably because we use .cfi_* there.
The problem is that, although pc_rtx is expected to be unique, it is
recreated by each
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Kai Tietz wrote:
2012-02-28 Kai Tietz kti...@redhat.com
* soft-fp/soft-fp.h (_FP_STRUCT_LAYOUT): If not defined,
define it as empty macro.
* soft-fp/quad.h: Mark bitfield-structures by _FP_STRUCT_LAYOUT.
* soft-fp/extended.h: Likewise.
We need a reliable way to test for v9/v8plus/whatever properly because
nobody is testing current gcc with real 32-bit pre-v9 sparc hardware and
not providing atomics and proper cpu_relax implementations is just silly.
Both libgomp and libitm already force -mcpu=v9 though (and simply aren't
From: Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 21:41:23 +0100
I think the issue is just how we unify the two cpu_relax implementations:
static inline void
cpu_relax (void)
{
#if defined __arch64__ || defined __sparc_v9__
__asm volatile (membar #LoadLoad : : : memory);
On Feb 27, 2012, at 11:58 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
This patch fixed PR 52373,
This 52373:
Bug 52373 - template usage drops some checks on the accessibility of a member
?
I'm not sure, because I'm pretty sure this type of membar acts as a
NOP on basically every sparc v9 chip ever made.
OK, I was inferring from the libgomp implementation that the #LoadLoad variant
might also have yielding properties.
I would prefer to see the rd %%ccr used in both places if
Hello,
On Tuesday 14 February 2012 12:42:21 Tobias Burnus wrote:
Fortunately, -O0 is often sufficient to remove the reallocation code.
I guess you mean -O1 here...
In turn, the warning might be printed even if at the end no realloc code is
generated or present with -O1.
Can it be caused
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:07:20AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
On Feb 27, 2012, at 8:41 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Currently the testsuite/boehm-gc.c/thread_leak_test.c executation test
will hang on several targets including x86_64-apple-darwin10/11 for
-m32/-m64.
The attached patch eliminates
The following patch fixes a few GCC testsuite regressions on s390x (the
bootstrap on s390x is still broken).
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 184608.
2012-02-27 Vladimir Makarov vmaka...@redhat.com
* lra-eliminations.c
On Feb 27, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
Since this is just a testsuite issue in boehm-gc, wouldn't this be Hans'
call? I would definitely
like to get this fixed in gcc 4.7 so that the boehm-gc testsuite doesn't
suffer timeouts. Also note
that gcc 4.7 is the first release which
Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net writes:
On Feb 27, 2012, at 11:58 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
This patch fixed PR 52373,
This 52373:
Bug 52373 - template usage drops some checks on the accessibility of a member
Let's pretend I said 52372...
(Now also added to the changelog)
Richard
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 02:38:14PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com writes:
Jakub Jelinekja...@redhat.com writes:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:07:39PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
The following patch has remained unreviewed for a week:
[v3, libgomp,
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 00:12:33 +0100
Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
and $(EGREP) -v '#(#| |$$)' just throws away the whole
};# Appended to version file.
line. I wonder if
sed -e 's/#[# $].*$//'
wouldn't be better, or alternative add ^ before the first #
in the egrep regex. Of course
Hi,
the first patch in the series deals with plain MEM_REFs on LHS of
assignments to handle situations such as the testcase which currently
fails on strict alignment platforms (the array and the loop are there
to cross a cache line on ia64 so that it fails there too).
This patch piggy-backs on
Hi,
this is another iteration of my attempts to fix expansion of
misaligned memory accesses on strict-alignment platforms (which was
suggested by Richi in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg00931.html and my first
attempt was posted as
Hi,
the second patch in the series handles MEM_REFs on LHS which are parts
of a handled_component, usually a COMPONENT_REF. The failing testcase
which requires it is not actually the one in the patch but it is
gcc.c-torture/execute/mayalias-3.c which fails at -O1 without this
change but with the
Hi,
this patch fixes misaligned reads through MEM_REFs such as the one in
the testcase which currently fails on both sparc64 and ia64 (again,
the array and the loop are there to cross ia64 cache line and fail
there too). The patch has to be applied last in the series so that
the current LHS
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
The problem is that config/abi/pre/gnu.ver doesn't end with a newline,
[...]
Of course we can add a newline to gnu.ver, but the
next time somebody forgots to add a newline at the end of the file
we'll have the same problem again.
I seem to remember
65 matches
Mail list logo
