Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On 15/02/16 08:24, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: If we are talking about pr 68580, then I would try: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68580#c2 first. As I tried to explain in the follow-up comment ( https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68580#c3 ), since unfortunately I have no

[PATCH PR69821] gcc: add option gno-record-debug-prefix-map

PR other/69821 * common.opt (grecord-debug-prefix-map, gno-record-debug-prefix-map): New options. * dwarf2out.c:(gen_producer_string) Use option to filter -fdebug-prefix-map * doc/invoke.texi: Document -grecord-debug-prefix-map and -gno-record-debug-prefix-map. Signed-off-by:

Re: [PATCH] 69780 - [4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on __builtin_alloca_with_align, with small alignment

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 07:16:13PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote: > +case BUILT_IN_ALLOCA_WITH_ALIGN: > + { > + /* Get the requested alignment (in bits) if it's a constant > +integer expression. */ > + HOST_WIDE_INT align = > + TREE_CODE (args [1]) == INTEGER_CST ?

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69595, bogus -Warray-bound warning

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > > *** gcc/match.pd(revision 233067) > > --- gcc/match.pd(working copy) > > *** DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT) > > *** 2094,2099 > > --- 2094,2117 > > (bit_and:c (ordered

Re: [PATCH] Avoid bugs like PR68273 to trigger

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > No, but if there is none left why would you want to "fix" SRA? > > As expected, it seems that the make_ssa_name_fn kludge is not sufficient, so > I'm proposing to disable the PR65310 one-liner for selected targets, using > the >

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On 15/02/16 09:07, Tom de Vries wrote: >>On 15/02/16 08:24, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >>If we are talking about pr 68580, then I would try: >>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68580#c2 >>first. > > As I tried to explain in the follow-up comment ( >

Re: [PING][PATCH] Don't mark offload symbols with force_output in ltrans

On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Tom de Vries wrote: > [ was: [PING][PATCH] Mark symbols in offload tables with force_output in > read_offload_tables ] > > On 08/02/16 14:20, Tom de Vries wrote: > > On 26/01/16 14:01, Ilya Verbin wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 13:21:57 +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > > >

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 15/02/16 09:07, Tom de Vries wrote: >>>On 15/02/16 08:24, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >>> >>>If we are talking about pr 68580, then I would try: >>>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68580#c2 >>>

Re: [PATCH PR69821] gcc: add option gno-record-debug-prefix-map

On 02/15/2016 04:09 PM, Hongxu Jia wrote: PR other/69821 * common.opt (grecord-debug-prefix-map, gno-record-debug-prefix-map): New options. * dwarf2out.c:(gen_producer_string) Use option to filter -fdebug-prefix-map * doc/invoke.texi: Document -grecord-debug-prefix-map and

[PATCH] Fix PR69783

The following fixes PR69783, a missed optimization after my fix to vectorizer runtime alias test merging. While I still don't understand the existing test guarding the merging (I've just fixed up things to its assumptions based on the original posting), the following patch adds two trivially

[PING][PATCH, PR67709 ] Don't call call_cgraph_insertion_hooks in simd_clone_create

On 08/02/16 13:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 01:46:44PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: [ The pass before pass_omp_simd_clone is pass_dispatcher_calls. It has a function create_target_clone, similar to simd_clone_create, with a node.defition and !node.defition part. The

[PATCH] Improve PTA restrict handling for non-restrict pointers

Currently we only disambiguate restrict based accesses against pointer based accesses that end up using a default def. The following removes this restriction allowing disambiguation against any pointer based access where PTA computed that the pointer cannot point to one of the restrict tags we

Re: [PATCH] s390: Add -fsplit-stack support

On 02/14/2016 05:01 PM, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: > libgcc/ChangeLog: > > * config.host: Use t-stack and t-stack-s390 for s390*-*-linux. > * config/s390/morestack.S: New file. > * config/s390/t-stack-s390: New file. > * generic-morestack.c (__splitstack_find): Add

[Ping][PATCH][GCC-5] Fix "#pragma GCC pop_options" warning.

On 18/01/16 11:04, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: Hi there, Can we have the "#pragma GCC pop_options" fix backported to GCC-5? Patch found in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01261.html and was committed in r228794. The same patch applies cleanly to gcc-5, which would otherwise not

Re: [PATCH] s390: Add -fsplit-stack support

On 15/02/16 11:21, Andreas Krebbel wrote: On 02/14/2016 05:01 PM, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: libgcc/ChangeLog: * config.host: Use t-stack and t-stack-s390 for s390*-*-linux. * config/s390/morestack.S: New file. * config/s390/t-stack-s390: New file. *

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On 15/02/16 10:07, Bernd Edlinger wrote: On 15/02/16 09:07, Tom de Vries wrote: >>On 15/02/16 08:24, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >>If we are talking about pr 68580, then I would try: >>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68580#c2 >>first. > >As I tried to explain in the

Re: [Patch AArch64] Use software sqrt expansion always for -mlow-precision-recip-sqrt

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:57:44AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:59:34PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:21:25AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:53:39AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, >

Re: [Patch AArch64] GCC 6 regression in vector performance. - Fix vector initialization to happen with lane load instructions.

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:56:29AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:29:29AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 03:22:11PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > In a number of cases where we try to create vectors we end up

Re: [Patch AArch64] Restrict 16-bit sqrdml{sa}h instructions to FP_LO_REGS

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 12:52:00PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:04:47PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > In their forms using 16-bit lanes, the sqrdmlah and sqrdmlsh instruction > > available when compiling with -march=armv8.1-a are only usable

Re: [AArch64] Remove AARCH64_EXTRA_TUNE_RECIP_SQRT from Cortex-A57 tuning

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:57:10AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:00:01PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:20:46AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:04:43PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, >

Re: [PATCH 2/4 v2][AArch64] Add support for FCCMP

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:55:40PM -0600, Evandro Menezes wrote: > > Got it. > > Let me try this again: > >Add support for the FCCMP insn types > >2016-01-21 Evandro Menezes > >gcc/ > * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (fccmp): Change insn type. >

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 15/02/16 10:07, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >> >> On 15/02/16 09:07, Tom de Vries wrote: >>On 15/02/16 08:24, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> >>If we are talking about pr 68580, then I would try: >>

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On 15/02/16 08:18, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > llvm tsan tests contain test.h file (probably what's called > test_barrier.h in gcc), you can put the macro there. test.h should > already be included into all tests. Hmm.. as the person who introduced test_barrer.h (well before llvm had a test.h ;) I

Re: [PATCH, ARM] stop changing signedness in PROMOTE_MODE

On 04/02/16 08:58, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 2:15 AM, Jim Wilson wrote: This is my suggested fix for PR 65932, which is a linux kernel miscompile with gcc-5.1. The problem here is caused by a chain of events. The first is that the relatively

Re: [PATCH] s390: New mcount call sequence for z900+ CPUs in 31-bit mode.

On 21/01/16 14:03, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: On TARGET_CPU_ZARCH && !TARGET_64BIT, we can use a similiar lean mcount call sequence to TARGET_64BIT. The longer sequences are now used only on deprecated g5/g6 CPUs. Tested on s390-ibm-linux-gnu on RHEL 7.2. gcc/ChangeLog: *

Re: [PATCH] s390: New mcount call sequence for z900+ CPUs in 31-bit mode.

On 01/21/2016 02:03 PM, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/s390/s390.c (s390_function_profiler): Add a new sequence > for z900+ CPUs in 31-bit mode. Applied. Thanks! -Andreas-

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 15/02/16 08:18, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> llvm tsan tests contain test.h file (probably what's called >> test_barrier.h in gcc), you can put the macro there. test.h should >> already be included into all tests.

Re: [Patch, regex, libstdc++/69794] Unify special character parsing

On 13/02/16 11:13 -0800, Tim Shen wrote: I did it wrong in r227289 - I ignored the "\n" special case in grep. Turns out using code to handle special cases is error prone, so I turned to use data (_M_grep_spec_char and _M_egrep_spec_char). Those new members change the size of the type, so are

Re: [RS6000] reload_vsx_from_gprsf splitter

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 02:57:22PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:54:19AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > > > Another concern I had about this, besides using %L in asm output (what > > > forces TFmode to use just fprs?), is what happens when we're using > > > IEEE 128-bit

Re: Fix PR69752, insn with REG_INC being removed as equiv_init insn

On 02/12/2016 08:43 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 02/11/2016 06:28 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: PR rtl-optimization/69752 * ira.c (update_equiv_regs): When looking for more than a single SET, also take other side effects into account. OK for the trunk. Branches too? The problem obviously

AW: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On 15/02/16 13:05, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Bernd Edlinger > wrote: >> >> No problem. PR65400 was a GCC wrong code bug, so it makes no >> sense to have the same test in llvm's tree, thus we are free to fix it on >> our own, as we like.

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 15/02/16 13:05, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Bernd Edlinger >> wrote: >>> >>> No problem. PR65400 was a GCC wrong code bug, so it makes no >>> sense to

Re: lra-remat issues (PR68730)

On 02/04/2016 09:27 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote: After a few false starts, I came up with the patch below, which keeps track of not just the candidate insn, but also an activation insn, and chooses candidates only if they are both available and active. Besides passing a new arg to create_cand,

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

Hi, Ping! Thanks, Jim On 02/02/2016 08:51 AM, James Norris wrote: Hi! On 02/01/2016 02:03 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:41:50PM -0600, James Norris wrote: The attached patch resolves c/PR64748. The patch adds the use of parm's with the deviceptr clause. [snip

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR64748

On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 08:51:23AM -0600, James Norris wrote: > --- a/gcc/cp/semantics.c > +++ b/gcc/cp/semantics.c > @@ -6683,6 +6683,14 @@ finish_omp_clauses (tree clauses, bool allow_fields, > bool declare_simd) > error ("%qD appears both in data and map clauses", t); >

Re: [RS6000] reload_vsx_from_gprsf splitter

Alan Modra wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 02:57:22PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > Right. It's a bit unfortunate that we can't just use IFmode > > unconditionally, > > but it seems rs6000_scalar_mode_supported_p (IFmode) may return false, and > > then we probably shouldn't be using it. > >

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69595, bogus -Warray-bound warning

On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > On Sun, 14 Feb 2016, Marc Glisse wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > > *** gcc/match.pd (revision 233067) > > > --- gcc/match.pd (working copy) > > > *** DEFINE_INT_AND_FLOAT_ROUND_FN (RINT) > > > ***

Re: add check for aarch64 in check_effective_target_section_anchors()

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 11:03:23PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > Hi, > aarch64 supports section anchors but it appears > check_effective_target_section_anchors() doesn't contain entry for it. > This patch adds for entry for aarch64. > OK for trunk ? OK. I presume you tested this, and the

Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Add __array_size keyword

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 03:16:49AM +, Stuart Brady wrote: > As a brief aside, I do get an ICE with the following source, without any > modifications of my own: > >int bar() { return foo(); } >void baz(int c[foo()]) { return; } > > I will look into submitting a PR for this properly

Re: [RS6000] reload_vsx_from_gprsf splitter

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 02:57:22PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:54:19AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: >> > > Another concern I had about this, besides using %L in asm output (what >> > > forces

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/66786 (ICE with nested lambdas in variable template)

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: > Here, we are calling template_class_depth on a FIELD_DECL corresponding > to a lambda that is used inside variable template. template_class_depth > however does not see that this FIELD_DECL is used inside a variable >

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69771, bogus CONST_INT during shift expansion

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 07:50:25AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 05:34:21PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 03:20:07PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > > >>- mode1 = GET_MODE (xop1) != VOIDmode ? GET_MODE (xop1) : mode; > > > >>+ mode1 = GET_MODE

Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Add __array_size keyword

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 03:05:36PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 03:16:49AM +, Stuart Brady wrote: > > I will look into submitting a PR for this properly soon, but will not > > mind if someone wants to take this task upon themselves instead, > > especially as we are

Re: Use plain -fopenacc to enable OpenACC kernels processing

On 10/02/16 15:40, Thomas Schwinge wrote: Hi! Will this patch be acceptable for GCC trunk in the current development stage? In its current incarnation, this patch depends on my 'Un-parallelized OpenACC kernels constructs with nvptx offloading: "avoid offloading"' patch,

Re: [AArch64] Remove AARCH64_EXTRA_TUNE_RECIP_SQRT from Cortex-A57 tuning

On 02/15/16 04:50, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:57:10AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:00:01PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:20:46AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:04:43PM +, James

Re: add check for aarch64 in check_effective_target_section_anchors()

On 15 February 2016 at 19:24, James Greenhalgh wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 11:03:23PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> Hi, >> aarch64 supports section anchors but it appears >> check_effective_target_section_anchors() doesn't contain entry for it. >> This patch

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69771, bogus CONST_INT during shift expansion

On February 15, 2016 4:34:38 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 07:50:25AM +, James Greenhalgh wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 05:34:21PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 03:20:07PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> > > >>-

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69771, bogus CONST_INT during shift expansion

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:58:45PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > We could also force_reg those at expansion or apply SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED to > those invalid constants there. Sure, but for force_reg we'd still need the gen_int_mode anyway. As for SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED, it should have been

[gomp-nvptx 0/5] Reorganize soft-stack setup

I've committed the following 5-patch series to amonakov/gomp-nvptx git branch. The first two patches are unrelated fixes to previously landed code. Patches 3-5 reorganize the way initial soft-stack setup is done. Previously soft-stacks used to be allocated by libgomp/config/nvptx/team.c in a

[gomp-nvptx 2/5] Revert "nvptx plugin: bump heap size to 1GB"

This reverts commit 7d36b841341cde96f6cf89c5232916062da3fe4c. The change was not well motivated: soft stacks would not fit in the default 8 MB heap only with multiple teams. With the transition to host-allocated soft stacks, libgomp uses the device heap only for relatively small allocations.

[gomp-nvptx 1/5] libgomp plugin: correct types

Handling of arguments array wrongly assumed that 'long' would match the size of 'void *'. As that would break on MinGW, use 'intptr_t'. Use 'int' for 'teams' and 'threads', as that's what cuLaunchKernel accepts. * plugin/plugin-nvptx.c (nvptx_adjust_launch_bounds): Adjust types.

[gomp-nvptx 3/5] nvptx backend: set up stacks in entry code

This patch implements the NVPTX backend part of the transition to host-allocated soft stacks. The compiler-emitted kernel entry code now accepts a pointer to stack storage and per-warp stack size, and initialized __nvptx_stacks based on that (as well as trivially initializing __nvptx_uni). The

[gomp-nvptx 4/5] libgomp: remove __nvptx_stacks setup code

This patch implements the NVPTX libgomp part of the transition to host-allocated soft stacks. The wrapper around gomp_nvptx_main previously responsible for that is no longer needed. This mostly reverts commit b408f1293e29a009ba70a3fda7b800277e1f310a. * config/nvptx/team.c:

[gomp-nvptx 5/5] libgomp plugin: manage soft-stack storage

This patch implements the libgomp plugin part of the transition to host-allocated soft stacks. For now only a simple scheme with allocation/deallocation per launch is implemented; a followup change is planned to cache and reuse allocations when appropriate. The call to cuLaunchKernel is changed

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69291, RTL if-conversion bug

Richard Biener writes: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > >> On 02/10/2016 02:50 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> > >> > > On 02/10/2016 02:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> > > >> > > > Index: gcc/ifcvt.c >> > > >

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On Feb 15, 2016, at 3:29 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > And independently of that I am looking at using llvm's test.h framework > instead > of gcc's test_barrier.h for gcc-7 soon. Here’s to hoping that we don’t back slide on:

Re: [RFC, PR68580] Handle pthread_create error in tsan testsuite

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Feb 15, 2016, at 3:29 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >> And independently of that I am looking at using llvm's test.h framework >> instead >> of gcc's test_barrier.h for gcc-7 soon. > > Here’s

C++ PATCH for c++/68890 (ICE with constexpr value-initialization)

Here, my assertion that a CONSTRUCTOR should be empty when we start to give it an initial value was forgetting about the case of classes with non-user-defined constructors, where value-initialization first zero-initializes, then calls the synthesized constructor. Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69771, bogus CONST_INT during shift expansion

On February 15, 2016 7:15:35 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:58:45PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: >> We could also force_reg those at expansion or apply >SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED to those invalid constants there. > >Sure, but for force_reg we'd still

Re: [PATCH, rs6000] Add -maltivec=be semantics in LE mode for vec_ld and vec_st

Wow, that's pretty bad; obviously a pasto. Thanks for pointing it out! I'm really surprised this has survived this long, but that may be a comment on how much lvxl is used. I'll get this fixed asap. Thanks, Bill On Tue, 2016-02-09 at 18:25 +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Hi Bill, > > >

[COMMITTED] Fix a typo in comment

Hi, I've committed the following as obvious in trunk r233428. Thanks Bernd. --- ChangeLog (revision 233427) +++ ChangeLog (working copy) @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +2016-02-15 Bernd Edlinger + + * alias.c (get_alias_set): Fix a typo in comment. + 2016-02-15

[PATCH] Fix reassoc ICE (PR tree-optimization/69802)

Hi! The following patch fixes an ICE where one of the range tests is SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT of a bool/_Bool or unsigned : 1 bitfield. In that case, we don't know where to put the adjusted range test. The patch for this uncommon case gives up, unless the range test can be the SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT itself,

[PATCH] Fix ICE in sync_resolve_size (PR c++/69797)

Hi! In C++, if there are no parameters, params can be non-NULL, but still empty vector. Fixed by properly testing for empty vector. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? 2016-02-15 Jakub Jelinek PR c++/69797 * c-common.c

[PATCH] Fix ICE in vcond expansion with -mavx512f -mno-avx512bw (PR target/69820)

Hi! We ICE on the following testcase, because vcondv32hiv32hi pattern really needs avx512bw, but it is enabled for avx512f. As VI_512 iterator is only used in vcond* patterns which need the avx512bw ISA for the V64QI and V32HI modes, I've changed that iterator. Or do you prefer to keep that

[PATCH] Fix up vectorization of multiplication with bool cast to integer (PR tree-optimization/69820)

Hi! The following testcase is miscompiled, because we first create a pattern stmt for _5 = (int) _3; where _3 is bool, but then recognize the following multiply as widening multiply, ignore there the previous pattern stmt and thus instead of expanding the cast as cond ? 1 : 0 we actually end up

C++ PATCH for c++/69753 (DR141 broke member template lookup)

When we stopped finding function templates with unqualified lookup due to the DR141 fix, that exposed bugs in our lookup within the object expression scope; an object-expression of the current instantiation does not make the expression dependent. This patch fixes this issue specifically for

Re: [PATCH] Fix ICE in sync_resolve_size (PR c++/69797)

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 09:56:04PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > In C++, if there are no parameters, params can be non-NULL, but still > empty vector. Fixed by properly testing for empty vector. > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk? > > 2016-02-15

Re: [PATCH 2/4 v2][AArch64] Add support for FCCMP

On 02/15/16 04:53, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 04:55:40PM -0600, Evandro Menezes wrote: Got it. Let me try this again: Add support for the FCCMP insn types 2016-01-21 Evandro Menezes gcc/ * config/aarch64/aarch64.md

Re: [PATCH] Fix reassoc ICE (PR tree-optimization/69802)

Hi, On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > + /* If op is default def SSA_NAME, there is no place to insert the > + new comparison. Give up, unless we can use OP itself as the > + range test. */ > + if (op && SSA_NAME_IS_DEFAULT_DEF (op)) > +{ > + if (op == range->exp >

Re: [PATCH] Fix reassoc ICE (PR tree-optimization/69802)

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 10:27:16PM +0100, Michael Matz wrote: > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > + /* If op is default def SSA_NAME, there is no place to insert the > > + new comparison. Give up, unless we can use OP itself as the > > + range test. */ > > + if (op &&

[6 Regession] Usage of unitialized pointer io/list_read.c (

The title of the PR should be "Mishandling of namelist comments" or "Interpreting '!' as a comment in non-namelist reads". The attached patch fixes the regression by reverting the previous attempt at namelist comments that used only CASE_SEPARATOR to enable comments in namelists. The approach

Re: [C++ PATCH] Fix regression due to reshape_init being called multiple times (PR c++/69658)

OK, thanks. Jason

Re: [6 Regession] Usage of unitialized pointer io/list_read.c (

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Jerry DeLisle wrote: > The title of the PR should be "Mishandling of namelist comments" or > "Interpreting '!' as a comment in non-namelist reads". > > The attached patch fixes the regression by reverting the previous attempt at > namelist

Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Add __array_size keyword

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016, Stuart Brady wrote: > > Critical issues to define and cover thoroughly in tests include the > > rules for when operands of sizeof are evaluated, as adapted > > appropriately for this keyword, and for when it returns various kinds > > of constants. > > So in other words,

Re: [PATCH] 69759 - document __builtin_alloca and __builtin_alloca_with_align

The description here is self-contradictory; __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__ bytes is often different from the greatest fundamental alignment (fundamental alignments and max_align_t only consider standard C types, __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__ can allow for e.g. vector type extensions). -- Joseph S. Myers

Re: [RS6000] reload_vsx_from_gprsf splitter

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:42:35AM -0800, David Edelsohn wrote: > Is there still an issue with the constraints used for movdi_internal64? Yes and no. No because we shouldn't be attempting DI moves between vsx regs and gprs. Yes because we ought to allow DImode in vsx regs, but fixing that is

Re: [RS6000] reload_vsx_from_gprsf splitter

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:42:35AM -0800, David Edelsohn wrote: >> Is there still an issue with the constraints used for movdi_internal64? > > Yes and no. No because we shouldn't be attempting DI moves between vsx > regs and

Re: [PING][PATCH, PR67709 ] Don't call call_cgraph_insertion_hooks in simd_clone_create

> On 08/02/16 13:54, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 01:46:44PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote: > >>[ The pass before pass_omp_simd_clone is pass_dispatcher_calls. It has a > >>function create_target_clone, similar to simd_clone_create, with a > >>node.defition and !node.defition part.

Re: Fix PR69752, insn with REG_INC being removed as equiv_init insn

On 02/15/2016 05:38 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 02/12/2016 08:43 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 02/11/2016 06:28 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: PR rtl-optimization/69752 * ira.c (update_equiv_regs): When looking for more than a single SET, also take other side effects into account. OK for

Re: [PATCH] 69759 - document __builtin_alloca and __builtin_alloca_with_align

On 02/15/2016 04:18 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: The description here is self-contradictory; __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__ bytes is often different from the greatest fundamental alignment (fundamental alignments and max_align_t only consider standard C types, __BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT__ can allow for e.g. vector

Re: [Patch, regex, libstdc++/69794] Unify special character parsing

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:26 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > Those new members change the size of the type, so are an ABI change. > > Couldn't they be static members? Ahh right. Since they are just used for once, use them in the line. -- Regards, Tim Shen commit

Re: PATCH] Fix PR 31531: A microoptimization of isnegative of signed integer

Hi, >> I'm also failing to see why you can't enhance the existing Please find attached the patch that enhances the existing pattern. Please review the patch and let me know if any further modifications are required. Thanks, Naveendiff --git a/gcc/match.pd b/gcc/match.pd index 6c8ebd5..bd47a91

RFC: [Patch, PR Bug 60818] - ICE in validate_condition_mode on powerpc*-linux-gnu* ]

Hello All, This is related to the following bug: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60818 Test case: unsigned int ou; int jv(void) { unsigned int rg; return rg < ou; } Command line options used: '-O1' (fails for -O1 and above). Target: e500v2 (I was able to reproduce with e500mc,

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR69771, bogus CONST_INT during shift expansion

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 08:43:22PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On February 15, 2016 7:15:35 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek > wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 06:58:45PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > >> We could also force_reg those at expansion or apply >