Re: RFC [1/3] divmod transform v2

On 19 October 2016 at 03:03, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/17/2016 11:23 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> >> The divmod transform isn't enabled if target supports hardware div in >> the same or wider mode even if divmod libfunc is available for the >> given mode. > > Good. That seems

Re: [PATCH] Implement P0084R2, Emplace return type, for C++17

Hi Jonathan, On 17 October 2016 at 13:56, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > In C++17 the emplace_front and emplace_back members return a > reference. There isn't a very neat way to implement this, so it's just > lots of conditional compilation. > > This isn't an ABI break, because

Re: [PATCH, libfortran] PR 48587 Newunit allocator

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote: > +static bool *newunits; You could make this a bitmap (like sbitmap). A bit more code but makes a potentially quadratic search (when opening many units) less time consuming. Ciao! Steven

Re: [PATCH 0/8] NVPTX offloading to NVPTX: backend patches

On 10/17/2016 07:06 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote: I've just pushed two commits to the branch to fix this issue. Before those, the last commit left the branch in a state where an incremental build seemed ok (because libgcc/libgomp weren't rebuilt with the new cc1), but a from-scratch build was

Re: [Patch] Backport fix for PR 52085 to gcc-5-branch?

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > > Richard Biener writes: > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> The fix for PR 52085 went into trunk when trunk

Re: [patch] Fix PHI optimization issue with boolean types

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Hi, > > this is a regression present on the mainline and 6 branch: the compiler now > generates wrong code for the attached testcase at -O because of an internal > conflict about boolean types. The sequence is as

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Fix separate shrink-wrapping for TARGET_MULTIPLE

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:17:32AM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote: > > Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-linux {-m64,-m32}. I'll commit it > > if Iain's testing (on darwin) also succeeds. > > thanks! > > All-langs bootstrap was restored with the patch (and others in progress for > existing known

Re: [Patch] Backport fix for PR 52085 to gcc-5-branch?

Jakub Jelinek writes: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj >> wrote: >> > >> > Richard Biener writes: >> > >> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj >>

Re: [PATCH 1/7] make LABEL_REF_LABEL a rtx_insn *

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: +static inline void +set_label_ref_label (rtx ref, rtx_insn *label) +{ + XCEXP (ref, 0, LABEL_REF) = label; +} I guess I have to ask for a brief function comment for this. Otherwise OK. Bernd

Re: [PATCH] Fix computation of register limit for -fsched-pressure

> On Oct 17, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Pat Haugen wrote: > > On 10/17/2016 08:17 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >>> The patch here, https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01872.html, >>> attempted to scale down the register limit used by -fsched-pressure for the >>>

Re: [PATCH 2/7] make tablejump_p return the label as a rtx_insn *

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: * cfgcleanup.c (merge_blocks_move_successor_nojumps): Adjust. (outgoing_edges_match): Likewise. (try_crossjump_to_edge): Likewise. * cfgrtl.c (try_redirect_by_replacing_jump): Likewise.

Re: [PATCH] Clear BB_VISITED in bb-reorder

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 5:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > $subject, applied as obvious. > > I think you should do the same for the vectorizer too. I noticed that > when testing the patch for loop splitting. Can't see where

Re: [Patch] Backport fix for PR 52085 to gcc-5-branch?

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj > wrote: > > > > Richard Biener writes: > > > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj > >>

Re: RFC [1/3] divmod transform v2

On 18 October 2016 at 13:55, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> On 18 October 2016 at 02:46, Jeff Law wrote: >> > On 10/15/2016 11:59 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: >> >> >> >> This patch is mostly the same as previous

Re: [Patch] Backport fix for PR 52085 to gcc-5-branch?

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:46:29PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > > I'm not convinced it is desirable to backport such changes, it affects ABI, > > people are used to deal with minor ABI changes in between major GCC > > releases, but we'd need a strong reason to change it between minor

Re: [PATCH 5/7] remove cast in delete_insn_chain

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders * cfgrtl.c (delete_insn_chain): Change argument type to rtx_insn * and adjust for that. *

Re: [PATCH 6/7] remove cast from prev_nonnote_insn_bb

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders * emit-rtl.c (prev_nonnote_insn_bb): Change argument type to rtx_insn *. * rtl.h

[PATCH] Fix BB_VISITED clearing in IRA, remove substitue-and-fold dce flag

This fixes the BB_VISITED bug in IRA I ran into earlier this year, removing the superfluous clearing in VRP and the SSA propagator as well as removing the now always true do_dce flag from substitute-and-fold. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk. Richard.

Re: [PATCH] Reduce stack usage in sha512 (PR target/77308)

Hi, On 17 October 2016 at 18:47, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > > On 30/09/16 14:34, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >> >> On 09/30/16 12:14, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >>> >>> Eric Botcazou wrote: > > A comment before the SETs and a testcase would be nice. IIRC > we do have

Re: [Patch, reload, tentative, PR 71627] Tweak conditions in find_valid_class_1

Ping! Regards Senthil Senthil Kumar Selvaraj writes: > Bernd Schmidt writes: > >> On 09/16/2016 09:02 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: >>> Does this make sense? I ran a reg test for the avr target with a >>> slightly older version of this patch, it did not show any regressions. >>> If

[PATCH, libgo]: Fix FAIL: time testsuite failure

The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from: $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z -01 Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure. Uros. diff --git a/libgo/go/time/time_test.go b/libgo/go/time/time_test.go index b7ebb37..694e311 100644 --- a/libgo/go/time/time_test.go +++

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR77916

On 18 October 2016 at 05:18, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2016.10.18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: >> On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 identifies a situation >> > where

Re: [rs6000] Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode with no special constant pool

[ sorry for losing track of this patch ] On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 10:32:51AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Use "mode" instead of "Pmode" here? > > No, "mode" is the mode of the MEM, not that of the SYMBOL_REF. I still don't see it, could you explain a bit more? Segher

Re: [rs6000] Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode with no special constant pool

> > No, "mode" is the mode of the MEM, not that of the SYMBOL_REF. > > I still don't see it, could you explain a bit more? MODE is the mode of operands[1] before: operands[1] = force_const_mem (mode, operands[1]); and after. But the test is on the address of the MEM, not on the MEM

Re: [PATCH 7/7] make targetm.gen_ccmp{first,next} take rtx_insn **

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: From: Trevor Saunders gcc/ChangeLog: 2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders * ccmp.c (expand_ccmp_expr_1): Adjust. (expand_ccmp_expr): Likewise. (expand_ccmp_next):

Re: [PATCH] Simplify conditions in EVRP, handle taken edge

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Richard Biener wrote: > > This refactors propagation vs. substitution and handles condition > simplification properly as well as passing a known taken edge down > to the DOM walker (avoiding useless work and properly handling PHIs). > > If we do all the work it's stupid to

Re: RFC [1/3] divmod transform v2

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > On 18 October 2016 at 02:46, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 10/15/2016 11:59 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: > >> > >> This patch is mostly the same as previous one, except it drops > >> targeting __udivmoddi4() because it gave undefined

Re: [PATCH] Fix computation of register limit for -fsched-pressure

> On Oct 18, 2016, at 1:27 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > >> >> On Oct 17, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Pat Haugen wrote: >> >> On 10/17/2016 08:17 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: The patch here,

Re: [PATCH 3/7] use rtx_insn * more

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: { - rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, insn, dest, seq; + rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, dest, seq; + rtx_insn *insn; switch (tls_symbolic_operand_type (x)) { @@ -1025,66 +1026,70 @@ alpha_legitimize_address_1 (rtx

Re: [Patch] Backport fix for PR 52085 to gcc-5-branch?

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj > wrote: > > > > Richard Biener writes: > > > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj > >>

Re: [PATCH] PR77895: DWARF: Emit DW_AT_comp_dir in all cases, even if source is an absolute path

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Ximin Luo wrote: >> >> Mike Stump: >>> On Oct 17, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Ximin Luo wrote: Therefore, it is better to emit it in all circumstances,

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR77916

On 2016.10.18 at 11:19 +0200, Christophe Lyon wrote: > On 18 October 2016 at 05:18, Markus Trippelsdorf > wrote: > > On 2016.10.18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > >> On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> >

Re: [PATCH, libfortran] PR 48587 Newunit allocator

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Janne Blomqvist wrote: >> +static bool *newunits; > > You could make this a bitmap (like sbitmap). A bit more code but makes > a potentially quadratic search (when opening many

Re: [PATCH 4/7] remove cast to rtx_insn * in remove_note

On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: 2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders * config/rl78/rl78.c (gen-and_emit_move): Change argument type to rtx_insn *. (transcode_memory_rtx): Likewise. (move_to_acc): Likewise.

[PATCH] Don't define uses-allocator variable templates in C++11

These variable templates give warnings in C++11 mode when -Wsystem-headers is used: In file included from /home/jwakely/gcc/7/include/c++/7.0.0/memory:77:0, from vt.cc:1: /home/jwakely/gcc/7/include/c++/7.0.0/bits/uses_allocator.h:130:20: warning: variable templates only

Re: [Patch, reload, tentative, PR 71627] Tweak conditions in find_valid_class_1

Bernd Schmidt writes: > On 10/13/2016 08:57 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: >> >> 2016-10-13 Senthil Kumar Selvaraj >> >> * reload.c (find_valid_class_1): Allow regclass if atleast one >> regno in class is ok. Compute and use rclass size based on

[PATCH] Make EVRP propagate into PHIs and remove dead stmts

The following patch makes EVRP remove stmts that will become dead after propagation. For this to work we have to propagate into PHIs (sth we missed as well). Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Richard. 2016-10-18 Richard Biener *

Re: [PATCH] Make EVRP propagate into PHIs and remove dead stmts

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:34:58PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > The following patch makes EVRP remove stmts that will become dead > after propagation. For this to work we have to propagate into PHIs > (sth we missed as well). > > Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. >

[Patch,testsuite] Fix sso.exp not calling torture-finish for avr

Hi, When analyzing reg test failures for the avr target, I noticed that the torture options were different when running dg-torture.exp compared to x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, resulting in additional failures. I also found that a bunch of "torture-without-loops not empty as expected" errors

Re: [PATCH, libgo]: Fix FAIL: time testsuite failure

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from: > > $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z > -01 > > Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure. Forgot to say that the patch was tested with tzdata2016g on Fedora 24 and CentOS

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR77916

On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > Hi, > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 identifies a situation > > where SLSR will ICE when exposed to a cast from integer to pointer. This > > is because

Re: [rs6000] Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode with no special constant pool

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > No, "mode" is the mode of the MEM, not that of the SYMBOL_REF. > > > > I still don't see it, could you explain a bit more? > > MODE is the mode of operands[1] before: > > operands[1] = force_const_mem (mode,

Re: [PATCH] PR77895: DWARF: Emit DW_AT_comp_dir in all cases, even if source is an absolute path

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Ximin Luo wrote: > Richard Biener: >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >>> On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Ximin Luo wrote: Mike Stump: > On Oct 17, 2016, at 11:00 AM,

Re: [PATCH, libgo]: Fix FAIL: time testsuite failure

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from: >> >> $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z >> -01 >> >> Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure. > >

Re: [PATCH, libgo]: Fix FAIL: time testsuite failure

Hi Uros, > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> The name of Etc/GMT+1 timezone is "-01", as evident from: >> >> $ TZ=Etc/GMT+1 date +%Z >> -01 >> >> Attached patch fixes the testsuite failure. > > Forgot to say that the patch was tested with tzdata2016g on

libgo patch committed: scan caller-saved regs for non-split-stack

While testing a libgo patch on Solaris, which does not support split-stack, I ran across a bug in the handling of caller-saved registers for the garbage collector. For non-split-stack systems, runtime_mcall is responsible for saving all caller-saved registers on the stack so that the GC stack

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR77916

Hi, The previous solution for PR77916 was inadequately tested, for which I sincerely apologize. I've reinstated the stopgap fix previously reverted, as follows. Thanks for your patience, Bill 2016-10-18 Bill Schmidt PR tree-optimization/77916 *

Re: [PATCH] PR77990 refactor unique_ptr to encapsulate tuple

On 17/10/16 14:37 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: We are incorrectly requiring unique_ptr deleters to be copyable here: explicit unique_ptr(pointer __p) noexcept : _M_t(__p, deleter_type()) { } We could just do: explicit unique_ptr(pointer __p) noexcept : _M_t()

Re: [Patch, reload, tentative, PR 71627] Tweak conditions in find_valid_class_1

On 10/18/2016 02:15 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: Will do both the changes and re-run the reg tests. Ok for trunk if the tests pass for x86_64-pc-linux and avr? Probably but let's see the patch first. Bernd

Re: [PATCH] PR77895: DWARF: Emit DW_AT_comp_dir in all cases, even if source is an absolute path

Richard Biener: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:44 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Ximin Luo wrote: >>> >>> Mike Stump: On Oct 17, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Ximin Luo wrote: > Therefore, it is better to emit it

Re: [PATCH 7/7] make targetm.gen_ccmp{first,next} take rtx_insn **

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:25:55PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > > From: Trevor Saunders > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > > > 2016-10-17 Trevor Saunders > > > > * ccmp.c

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR77916

On 2016.10.18 at 08:15 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 05:13 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > On 2016.10.17 at 17:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77916 identifies a situation > > > where SLSR will ICE when

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR77916

On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 15:30 +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > I you wish I can send you a tarball with the preprocessed *.i files from > ffmpeg, so that you can use a stage1 cross on them. > That would be very helpful, thanks! Bill

Re: [PATCH] Make EVRP propagate into PHIs and remove dead stmts

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Trevor Saunders wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:34:58PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > The following patch makes EVRP remove stmts that will become dead > > after propagation. For this to work we have to propagate into PHIs > > (sth we missed as well). > > > >

[PATCH] Use RPO order for domwalk dominator children sort

For extern void baz (); extern void boo (); extern void bla (); int a[100]; void foo (int n) { for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j) { if (a[j+5]) { if (a[j]) break; baz (); } else bla (); boo (); } } we happen to visit

Re: [PATCH 3/7] use rtx_insn * more

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:18:42PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 10/17/2016 09:46 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote: > > { > > - rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, insn, dest, seq; > > + rtx r0, r16, eqv, tga, tp, dest, seq; > > + rtx_insn *insn; > > > >switch

Re: [PATCH 3/7] use rtx_insn * more

On 10/18/2016 03:54 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: I do really prefer reading code where variables are declared at first use In general, so do I, but in this case it's one variable out of a whole bunch, which makes the entire thing look a little inconsistent. Bernd

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

Hi, in the language of our implementations details, submitter noticed that in terms of warnings we handle in a different way COND_EXPRs in tsubst_copy_and_build - we use fold_non_dependent_expr and integer_zerop to suppress undesired warnings by bumping c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings - and

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Align FP callee-saves

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:40:18PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > ping > > If the number of integer callee-saves is odd, the FP callee-saves use 8-byte > aligned LDP/STP.  Since 16-byte alignment may be faster on some CPUs, align > the FP callee-saves to 16 bytes and use the alignment gap for

Re: Go patch committed: copy print code from Go 1.7 runtime

Hello! > This patch copies the code that implements the print and println > predeclared functions from the Go 1.7 runtime. The compiler is > changed to use the new names, and to call the printlock and > printunlock functions around a sequence of print calls. The writebuf > field in the g struct

Re: [Patch] Backport fix for PR 52085 to gcc-5-branch?

Jakub Jelinek writes: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:46:29PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: >> > I'm not convinced it is desirable to backport such changes, it affects ABI, >> > people are used to deal with minor ABI changes in between major GCC >> > releases, but we'd need a strong reason

Re: [Patch, reload, tentative, PR 71627] Tweak conditions in find_valid_class_1

On 10/13/2016 08:57 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: 2016-10-13 Senthil Kumar Selvaraj * reload.c (find_valid_class_1): Allow regclass if atleast one regno in class is ok. Compute and use rclass size based on actually available

Re: [PATCH] Reduce stack usage in sha512 (PR target/77308)

On 18 October 2016 at 16:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 10/18/16 10:36, Christophe Lyon wrote: >> >> I am seeing a lot of regressions since this patch was committed: >> http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/241273/report-build-info.html >>

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR69566 - Failure of SELECT TYPE with unlimited polymorphic function result

Hi Andre, Thanks for a quick response: > You can use > >|| (e->symtree && UNLIMITED_POLY (e->symtree->n.sym)); Ah yes, you are quite right. > here. UNLIMITED_POLY does all the checks. I am still wondering whether this is > necessary? The symtree is set for expr_type == { EXPR_VARIABLE,

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR69566 - Failure of SELECT TYPE with unlimited polymorphic function result

Hi Paul, > For reasons I don't understand, sometimes the expression type comes > through as BT_DERIVED, whilst the symbol is BT_CLASS. I could repair > this in resolve.c(fixup_array_ref) if you think that would be cleaner. I think that I figured the rule: - when no _class-ref is present, then

Re: [PATCH 3/7] use rtx_insn * more

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 03:54:43PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 10/18/2016 03:54 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote: > > > > I do really prefer reading code where variables are declared at first > > use > > In general, so do I, but in this case it's one variable out of a whole > bunch, which makes

Re: Early jump threading

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:22:27AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > Hi, > > > this is the patch compensating testsuite I commited after re-testing > > > on x86_64-linux. > > > > > > Other placements of early_thread_jumps does

Re: [PATCH] PR77990 refactor unique_ptr to encapsulate tuple

On 10/18/2016 12:54 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > I'll wait a bit longer for any objections, as the refactoring could be > seen as unnecessary churn, but I think it's valuable housekeeping. Having stared at std::unique_ptr a lot recently, I like this, FWIW. Thanks, Pedro Alves

[PATCH][v6] GIMPLE store merging pass

Hi Richard, This patch is a merge of [1] and [2] and implements the manual merging of bitfields as outlined in [1] but actually makes it work on BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN too. It caused me a lot of headeache because the bit offset is counted from the most significant bit in the byte, even though

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR69566 - Failure of SELECT TYPE with unlimited polymorphic function result

Hi Paul, > Index: gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c > === > *** gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c (revision 241273) > --- gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c (working copy) > *** trans_associate_var (gfc_symbol *sym, gf > *** 1517,1523 >

Re: [patch] Fix PHI optimization issue with boolean types

On 10/18/2016 02:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Hi, this is a regression present on the mainline and 6 branch: the compiler now generates wrong code for the attached testcase at -O because of an internal conflict about

Re: [PATCH] Fix computation of register limit for -fsched-pressure

On 10/18/2016 05:31 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: >> > I see your point and agree that current code isn't optimal. However, I >> > don't think your patch is accurate either. Consider >> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Register-Basics.html and let's >> > assume that FIXED_REGISTERS in

RE: [RFC,PATCH,testsuite]

wrote: > Richard Biener writes: > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Matthew Fortune > > wrote: > > > I'd therefore like to apply the following. Any suggestions on the > > > testing that this needs? Would a

Re: [PATCH] Reduce stack usage in sha512 (PR target/77308)

On 10/18/16 10:36, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > I am seeing a lot of regressions since this patch was committed: > http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/241273/report-build-info.html > > (you can click on "REGRESSED" to see the list of regressions, "sum" > and "log" to

[Patch, fortran] PR69566 - Failure of SELECT TYPE with unlimited polymorphic function result

Dear All, This bug was caused by 'associate name' and 'associate entity' expressions being incomplete when the 'selector' was an intrinsic function result. I tried to fix this at source, in match_select _type and gfc_get_variable_expr, but caused a vast number of breakages. Undoubtedly, this

[PATCH, i386]: Fix PR 77991, ICE on x32 in plus_constant, at explow.c

Hello! We have to return Pmode RTX from legitimize_tls_address. There was a path that returned DImode, when SImode was expected. Since the code deals with various linker bugs, let's leave the generated sequence as-is and just convert it to Pmode before return. 2016-10-18 Uros Bizjak

Re: RFC [1/3] divmod transform v2

On 10/18/2016 02:25 AM, Richard Biener wrote: I don't even think we have a way of knowing in the compiler if the target has enabled divmod support in libgcc. Yeah, that's what bothers me with the current optab libfunc query setup -- it isn't reliable. I wonder if we ought to just have them

Re: [PATCH] Make -Wint-in-bool-context warn on suspicious shift ops

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > Hi, > > this restricts the -Wint-in-bool-context warning to signed shifts, > to reduce the number of false positives Markus reported yesterday. This patch seems to be missing testcases (that warned before the patch and don't warn after it). --

Re: [PATCH] Make -Wint-in-bool-context warn on suspicious shift ops

On 10/18/16 19:05, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> this restricts the -Wint-in-bool-context warning to signed shifts, >> to reduce the number of false positives Markus reported yesterday. > > This patch seems to be missing testcases (that warned

Re: [PATCH] xtensa: don't use unwind-dw2-fde-dip with elf targets

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Max Filippov wrote: > Define LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE to unwind-dw2-fde.c in > xtensa/t-elf and to unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c in xtensa/t-linux and use > LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE in LIB2ADDEH definition. > > 2016-10-17 Max Filippov

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve stack adjustment

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:38:36PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > ping > > > From: Wilco Dijkstra > Sent: 10 August 2016 17:20 > To: Richard Earnshaw; GCC Patches > Cc: nd > Subject: Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve stack adjustment >   > Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > I see you've added a

Re: [PATCH][AArch64] Improve stack adjustment

James Greenhalgh wrote: On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:38:36PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >> +  /* We need two add/sub instructions, each one perform part of the >> + addition/subtraction, but don't this if the addend can be loaded into >> + register by single instruction, in that case we

Re: [PATCH] xtensa: add HW FPU sequences for DIV/SQRT/RECIP/RSQRT

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Max Filippov wrote: > > Use new FPU instruction sequences documented in the ISA book to > implement __divsf3, __divdf3, __recipsf2, __recipdf2, __rsqrtsf2, > __rsqrtdf2 and __ieee754_sqrtf and __ieee754_sqrt. > > 2013-02-12 Ding-Kai Chen

Re: [PATCH 0/8] NVPTX offloading to NVPTX: backend patches

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their CUDA > version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host. The currently published OpenMP version of LULESH simply doesn't use openmp-simd anywhere. This should make it obvious that

Re: [PATCH] Make -Wint-in-bool-context warn on suspicious shift ops

Hi, this restricts the -Wint-in-bool-context warning to signed shifts, to reduce the number of false positives Markus reported yesterday. Bootstrap and reg-testing on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu was fine. Is it OK for trunk? Thanks Bernd. 2016-10-17 Bernd Edlinger *

[PATCH] Fix typos in experimental::shared_ptr

A couple of minor things I found whlie reviewing this code. * include/experimental/bits/shared_ptr.h (shared_ptr(shared_ptr&&)): Remove const from parameter. (operator<(const shared_ptr&, nullptr_t)): Use correct specialization of std::less. *

Re: [PATCH] xtensa: don't use unwind-dw2-fde-dip with elf targets

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:22 AM, augustine.sterl...@gmail.com wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Max Filippov wrote: >> Define LIB2ADDEH_XTENSA_UNWIND_DW2_FDE to unwind-dw2-fde.c in >> xtensa/t-elf and to unwind-dw2-fde-dip.c in

Re: [PATCH] xtensa: add HW FPU sequences for DIV/SQRT/RECIP/RSQRT

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:22 AM, augustine.sterl...@gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Max Filippov wrote: >> >> Use new FPU instruction sequences documented in the ISA book to >> implement __divsf3, __divdf3, __recipsf2,

Re: [PATCH] Fix typos in experimental::shared_ptr

On 18/10/16 19:30 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: A couple of minor things I found whlie reviewing this code. * include/experimental/bits/shared_ptr.h (shared_ptr(shared_ptr&&)): Remove const from parameter. (operator<(const shared_ptr&, nullptr_t)): Use correct

Re: [rs6000] Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode with no special constant pool

> We need to pass the mode of the actual datum we would put in the TOC to > the use_toc_relative_ref function, not the mode of its address. Right, but this mode is not "mode", the TOC contains only Pmode entries if the special constant pool is excluded. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: Use FOR_ALL_BB_FN in a few more places

Hi! On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 07:38:17 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On October 17, 2016 6:09:02 PM GMT+02:00, Thomas Schwinge > wrote: > >[FOR_ALL_BB_FN] > > > >We could use the former in a few more places; OK for trunk once tested? > > OK. As posted,

Re: [Ada] Set Always_Compatible_Rep to False everywhere

> Agreed, let's do that for starters. Here it is, applied on the mainline. 2016-10-18 Eric Botcazou * gcc-interface/Makefile.in (EXTRA_GNATRTL_NONTASKING_OBJS): Define. (EXTRA_GNATRTL_TASKING_OBJS): Likewise. (ARM/Android): Add atomic support.

Re: [PATCH 09/16] Split class rtx_reader into base_rtx_reader vs rtx_reader

[CCing Richard; this is re: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00273.html ] Essentially I want to split class rtx_reader into two parts: a base class covering the things implemented in read-md.o, and a subclass implemented in read-rtl.o. The motivation is that I want to make some

[PATCH, v2] Fix computation of register limit for -fsched-pressure

The patch here, https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-10/msg01872.html, attempted to scale down the register limit used by -fsched-pressure for the case where the block in question executes as frequently as the entry block to just the call_clobbered (i.e. call_used) regs. But the code is

Re: Clear basic block flags before using BB_VISITED for OpenACC loops processing

Hi! On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 15:38:50 +0200, I wrote: > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:08:44 +0200, Richard Biener > wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Thomas Schwinge > > wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:22:17 +0200, Richard Biener > > >

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

... sorry, what I sent earlier in fact causes a regression in the libstdc++-v3 testsuite: 23_containers/list/61347.cc. 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

Re: [rs6000] Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode with no special constant pool

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 08:37:47PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > We need to pass the mode of the actual datum we would put in the TOC to > > the use_toc_relative_ref function, not the mode of its address. > > Right, but this mode is not "mode", the TOC contains only Pmode entries if > the >

Re: [rs6000] Fix reload failures in 64-bit mode with no special constant pool

> I don't fully understand what you mean. This code was created for > PR65810, if that helps? OK, let's turn it into "mode" then, this doesn't change anything. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: [PATCH 0/8] NVPTX offloading to NVPTX: backend patches

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 07:58:49PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote: > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > The performance I saw was lower by a factor of 80 or so compared to their > > CUDA > > version, and even lower than OpenMP on the host. > > The currently published OpenMP version of

Re: RFC [1/3] divmod transform v2

On 10/17/2016 11:23 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote: The divmod transform isn't enabled if target supports hardware div in the same or wider mode even if divmod libfunc is available for the given mode. Good. That seems like the right thing to do. Thanks. I had erroneously assumed

  1   2   >