Re: Target header etc. cleanup patch

On Apr 2, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: In the course of trying to work out exactly what target macros there are, I came across various oddities in target headers (and a few in target .c files) that are fixed by this patch * Testing showed that IRA_COVER_CLASSES had not been

Re: [PATCH 4/6] Shrink-wrapping

On Jul 7, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: ... It'd also be nice to get rid of all these big blocks of code that are conditional on preprocessor macros, but I realise you're just following existing practice in the surrounding code, so again it can be left to a future cleanup.

Re: [PATCH 4/6] Shrink-wrapping

On Jul 7, 2011, at 1:00 PM, Jeff Law wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/07/11 10:58, Paul Koning wrote: On Jul 7, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: ... It'd also be nice to get rid of all these big blocks of code that are conditional on preprocessor

Re: Ping^2 Re: Target header etc. cleanup patch

On Apr 20, 2011, at 5:09 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: Ping^2. This patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg00130.html is still pending review. This version applies cleanly to current trunk. ... pdp11 is fine. Thanks! paul

Re: [PATCH 04/12] vax: Emit prologue as rtl.

On Jun 30, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: On 06/29/2011 04:01 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: How many TARGET_ASM_FUNCTION_{PRO,EPI}LOGUE targets are left anyway? Answering the question that it sounds like you actually asked: 2 or 3. Not that it does us that much good because of the

Re: RFC: 40 bit integer support

On Jul 1, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 07/01/11 22:04, Joseph S. Myers wrote: I should add: make the type, the new mode, the testcases etc. entirely target-specific; target-independent GCC should not need to know or care about the specifics of this type. It's bad enough

Re: [PATCH] C: underline parameters in mismatching function calls

> On Oct 2, 2017, at 4:05 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > ... > the C FE currently emits (trunk): > > test.c: In function 'caller': > test.c:5:25: warning: passing argument 2 of 'callee' makes pointer from > integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] > return callee

[PATCH, committed] fix a number of pdp11 target test failures

This fixes a number of test failures due to test cases that are too large for pdp11 and should be skipped. Also one test case that asks for alignment larger than what pdp11 supports. paul 2018-05-25 Paul Koning <n...@arrl.net> * gcc.c-torture/compile/20151204.c

[PATCH, committed] fix a number of pdp11 target test failures

Sorry, it's been a while, previous message was incomplete. This fixes a number of test failures due to test cases that are too large for pdp11 and should be skipped. Also one test case that asks for alignment larger than what pdp11 supports. paul 2018-05-25 Paul Koning &l

Re: [PATCH] Avoid optimizing memory references with side effects in compare-elim.c

> On Jun 7, 2018, at 11:37 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> Here is a corrected version. Ok with this change? >> >> paul >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> 2018-06-06 Paul Koning >> >> * compare-elim.c (try_merge_compare): D

Re: [PATCH] Come up with Deprecated option flag.

> On Jun 8, 2018, at 7:09 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > > Hi. > > First follow-up MPX removal patch comes up with Deprecated option flag. > That prints warning for options that have no effect: Should this be mentioned in the internals manual (section 8.2)? paul

[PATCH] add udivhi3, umodhi3 functions to libgcc

Paul Koning * udivhi3.c: New file. * udivmodhi4.c: New file. * config/pdp11/t-pdp11 (LIB2ADD): Add the above files. Index: config/pdp11/t-pdp11 === --- config/pdp11/t-pdp11(revision 260806) +++ config

[PATCH, committed] fix ICE in test suite on pdp11

This cures an ICE caused by a wrong pattern that produces invalid register references. gcc/ChangeLog 2018-05-27 Paul Koning <n...@arrl.net> * config/pdp11/pdp11.md (truncsihi2): Remove. Index: config/pdp11/pd

Re: [PATCH] add udivhi3, umodhi3 functions to libgcc

> On May 29, 2018, at 4:17 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 03:01:20PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: >> +short udivmodhi4 (); > > We do want real prototypes, not K declarations. Fixed. I had copied that from the SImode file. > >> Adde

Re: [PATCH] add udivhi3, umodhi3 functions to libgcc

> On Jun 1, 2018, at 5:04 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Tue, 29 May 2018, Paul Koning wrote: > >> +unsigned short udivmodhi4(unsigned short, unsigned short, int); > > libgcc should not have any such non-static functions in the user > namespace; they should a

[PATCH] Avoid optimizing memory references with side effects in compare-elim.c

constraint with the side effect omitted; I may try for that later on if that is still supported by the constraint machinery.) Tested against my in-progress CCmode pdp11 target. Ok to commit? paul gcc/ChangeLog: 2018-06-05 Paul Koning * compare-elim.c (addr_side_effect_check): New

[PATCH] Avoid optimizing memory references with side effects in compare-elim.c

generate a similar RTL suitable for a matching constraint with the side effect omitted; I may try for that later on if that is still supported by the constraint machinery.) Tested against my in-progress CCmode pdp11 target. Ok to commit? paul gcc/ChangeLog: 2018-06-05 Paul Koning

Re: [PATCH] Avoid optimizing memory references with side effects in compare-elim.c

> On Jun 5, 2018, at 3:54 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: > > Paul Koning writes: >> This fixes an ICE if post-reload compare elimination is done and the >> target supports post_inc and similar modes, as pdp11 does. The ICE is >> caused by a generated PARALLEL

Re: [PATCH] Avoid optimizing memory references with side effects in compare-elim.c

> On Jun 6, 2018, at 11:53 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> That simplifies the patch, which now looks like this. Ok for trunk? >> >> paul >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> 2018-06-05 Paul Koning >> >> * compare-elim.c

[PATCH, committed] Convert pdp11 back end to CCmode

with a machine that has two condition code registers. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-06-27 Paul Koning * common/config/pdp11/pdp11-common.c (pdp11_handle_option): Handle mutually exclusive options. * config/pdp11/constraints.md (h): New constraint. (O

[PATCH, committed] fix pdp11 target test failures

This patch fixes a number of test suite failures caused by data too large for the address space or alignment larger than supported by this target. paul testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-06-22 Paul Koning * gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib/chk.c: Use smaller alignment

[PATCH, committed] Add -mgnu-asm to pdp11 target, change -mdec-asm

. paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-01 Paul Koning * common/config/pdp11/pdp11-common.c (pdp11_handle_option): Handle -munit-asm, -mgnu-asm, -mdec-asm. * config/pdp11/pdp11-protos.h (pdp11_gen_int_label): New. (pdp11_output_labelref): New

Re: [PATCH] Use getentropy() for seeding PRNG

> On Aug 3, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Janne Blomqvist wrote: > > The getentropy function, found on Linux, OpenBSD, and recently also > FreeBSD, can be used to get random bytes to initialize the PRNG. It > is similar to the traditional way of reading from /dev/urandom, but > being a system call

Re: [PATCH 1/7] Add __builtin_speculation_safe_value

> On Jul 26, 2018, at 7:34 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > Port maintainers DO need to decide what to do about speculation, even if it is explicitly that no mitigation is needed. >>> >>> Agreed. But I didn't yet see a request for

Re: [PATCH 09/11] pdp11 - example of a port not needing a speculation barrier

> On Jul 27, 2018, at 5:37 AM, Richard Earnshaw > wrote: > > > This patch is intended as an example of all that is needed if the > target system doesn't support CPUs that have speculative execution. > I've chosen the pdp11 port on the basis that it's old enough that this > is likely to be

Re: [patch] improve internals documentation for nested function descriptors

> On Jul 27, 2018, at 4:39 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > > Apropos of the discussion about improving the docs for > TARGET_CUSTOM_FUNCTION_DESCRIPTORS in the context of the C-SKY port > submission, > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-07/msg01454.html > > here is the patch I've

Re: [PATCH] Add sinh(tanh(x)) and cosh(tanh(x)) rules

tch code and comments are still correct. > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Paul Koning wrote: >> Now I'm puzzled. >> >> I don't see how an infinite would show up in the original expression. I >> don't know hyperbolic functions, so I just constructed a small test p

Re: [PATCH] Add sinh(tanh(x)) and cosh(tanh(x)) rules

ano Augusto Faulin Belinassi > wrote: > > That is a good question because I didn't know that such targets > exists. Any suggestion? > > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 5:29 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> >> >>> On Aug 7, 2018, at 4:00 PM, Giuliano Augusto F

Re: [PATCH] Add sinh(tanh(x)) and cosh(tanh(x)) rules

> On Aug 7, 2018, at 4:00 PM, Giuliano Augusto Faulin Belinassi > wrote: > > Related with bug 86829, but for hyperbolic trigonometric functions. > This patch adds substitution rules to both sinh(tanh(x)) -> x / sqrt(1 > - x*x) and cosh(tanh(x)) -> 1 / sqrt(1 - x*x). Notice that the both >

[PATCH, committed] Fix rtl check error in pdp11

When building with checking enabled, there were check failures in pdp11_rtx_costs. This patch fixes two errors. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-14 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11.c (pdp11_rtx_costs): Bugfixes. Index: config/pdp11/pdp11.c

Re: [2/5] C-SKY port: Backend implementation

> On Jul 25, 2018, at 12:50 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > ... >>> It did. See TARGET_CUSTOM_FUNCTION_DESCRIPTORS and the (relatively few) >>> ports that define it. >> >> Hmmm, I completely failed to make that connection from the docs -- the >> whole description of that hook is pretty

Re: [PATCH 3/3] or1k: gcc: initial support for openrisc

> On Aug 30, 2018, at 9:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 08/30/2018 10:58 AM, Richard Henderson wrote: >> On 08/28/2018 07:13 AM, Jeff Law wrote: >>> Please consider using function descriptors rather than trampolines. >>> This allows you to make the stack non-executable at all times which is >>>

[PATCH] doc clarification: DONE and FAIL in define_split and define_peephole2

ribe those cases. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-05 Paul Koning * doc/md.texi (define_split): Document DONE and FAIL. Describe interaction with usual "#" output template in define_insn_and_split. (define_peephole2): Document DONE a

[PATCH, doc] Small clarification on define_subst

In doing CCmode work I was confused how define_subst handles cases where the same argument appears more than once. The attached clarifies this. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-08 Paul Koning * doc/md.texi (define_subst): Document how multiple occurrences

[PATCH] doc: add missing "mode" type attribute

butes. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-10 Paul Koning * doc/extend.texi (Common Variable Attributes): Move "mode" into alphabetical order. (Common Type Attributes): Add "mode&

Re: [PATCH] doc clarification: DONE and FAIL in define_split and define_peephole2

> On Jul 6, 2018, at 12:20 PM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: > > Double empty line. > > OK otherwise, thanks. (Think this counts as a gen* patch.) > > Richard Thanks. Committed as shown below. paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-06 Paul Koning * d

Re: [PATCH] doc clarification: DONE and FAIL in define_split and define_peephole2

+particular inputs it was given, and the input insns are left unchanged. > > If it FAILs, GCC will try to apply later define_peehole2s instead. > (This is in contrast to define_split, so it's a bit inconsistent. > Would be easy to make define_split behave the same way if there was a >

Re: [PATCH] doc: update looping constructs

> On Jul 12, 2018, at 1:42 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 07/12/2018 11:17 AM, Paul Koning wrote: >> >> >>> On Jul 12, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >>> >>> On 07/11/2018 06:20 PM, Paul Koning wrote: &g

[PATCH, committed] Fix typo in pdp11 target

This fixes a typo in the output of a ".set" directive. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-12 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11.c (pdp11_output_def): Fix typo in .set directive. Index: config/pdp

[PATCH] doc: update looping constructs

This patch removes the obsolete documentation for decrement_and_branch_until_zero. It also adds detail to the description for doloop_end. In particular, it describes the required form of the conditional branch part of the pattern. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-11 Paul

Re: [PATCH] doc: update looping constructs

> On Jul 12, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 07/11/2018 06:20 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> This patch removes the obsolete documentation for >> decrement_and_branch_until_zero. It also adds detail to the description for >> doloop_end. In particular, it

[PATCH, committed] Improve code generation for pdp11 target

This patch improves the generated code for the pdp11 target. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-07-09 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11.c (pdp11_addr_cost): New function. (pdp11_insn_cost): New function. (pdp11_md_asm_adjust): New function

[PATCH, committed] Fix insn length in pdp11 shift patterns

This patch corrects the setting of the "length" attributes in the pdp11 target for certain shift cases. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-06-28 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11-protos.h (pdp11_shift_length): New function. * config/pdp11/pdp11.c (pdp11_sh

[PATCH, pdp11] remove -mfloat32, -mfloat64

not a familiar thing to do on this machine. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-05 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11.h (FLOAT_TYPE_SIZE): Always 32. * config/pdp11/pdp11.opt (mfloat32): Remove. (mfloat64): Remove. * doc/invoke.texi (pdp11 -mfloat32): Re

[PATCH, pdp11] Fix LRA failure

This patch fixes a failure handling block moves when the LRA register allocator is used. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-08 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11-protos.h (output_block_move): Remove. (expand_block_move): New function. * config/pdp11/pdp11.c

[PATCH, pdp11] libgcc: remove -mfloat32

I missed a file that needed to be updated for the removal of -mfloat32. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-08 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/t-pdp11: Remove -mfloat32 switch. Index: config/pdp11/t-pdp11

[PATCH, doc] describe mode checking for doloop_end pattern

: 2018-10-11 Paul Koning * doc/md.texi (doloop_end): Document that the pattern code may need to check operand mode. Index: doc/md.texi === --- doc/md.texi (revision 265042) +++ doc/md.texi (working copy) @@ -7619,7

[PATCH, doc] describe mode checking for doloop_end pattern

: 2018-10-11 Paul Koning * doc/md.texi (doloop_end): Document that the pattern code may need to check operand mode. Index: md.texi === --- md.texi (revision 265042) +++ md.texi (working copy) @@ -7619,7 +7619,23

[PATCH, pdp11] fix problem with doloop_end

For some newlib sources, pdp11 doloop_end was creating problems because it was handed a QImode operand when it only wants HImode. This patch cures that, and also adds addqi3 and subqi3 patterns to help with that case. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-12 Paul Koning

Re: [PATCH] add udivhi3, umodhi3 functions to libgcc

> On Oct 18, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 10/17/18 5:48 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> This is a revision of a patch I proposed a while back, to add udivhi3 and >> umodhi3 functions to libgcc since some platforms (like pdp11) need it. The >> code is a

[PATCH] correct max alignment check in symtab.c

GCC was hitting an ICE on some pdp11 tests due to a typo in a max alignment check. Committed as obvious. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-22 Paul Koning * symtab.c (symtab_node::increase_alignment): Correct max alignment check. Index: symtab.c

Re: [PATCH] add udivhi3, umodhi3 functions to libgcc

copied does not do that, so I corrected mine and also changed the existing code to conform to the rules. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-17 Paul Koning * udivmodsi4.c (__udivmodsi4): Rename to conform to coding standard. * udivmod.c: Update references

Re: [PATCH, doc] describe mode checking for doloop_end pattern

> On Oct 11, 2018, at 11:01 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 10/11/18 3:09 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> Updated with an additional item I just debugged. >> >> Since the code that uses the doloop_end pattern does not check the operand >> mode as given in the pattern,

[PATCH, doc] Fix CONST_WIDE_INT_ELT

The description of CONST_WIDE_INT_ELT gave the macro's name as CONST_WIDE_INT_NUNITS instead. Committed as obvious. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-29 Paul Koning * doc/rtl.texi (CONST_WIDE_INT_ELT): Give correct macro name. Index: doc/rtl.texi

Re: Ping: [PATCH, testsuite]: check for weak support

> On Oct 30, 2018, at 10:17 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 10/30/18 6:55 AM, Paul Koning wrote: >> Ping. Ok to commit? >> >> paul >> >>> On Oct 25, 2018, at 2:57 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >>> >>> I ran into a failures due to

Ping: [PATCH, testsuite]: check for weak support

Ping. Ok to commit? paul > On Oct 25, 2018, at 2:57 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > I ran into a failures due to no weak symbol support in my target. This patch > cures that. Is it right? The test case uses "weakref" so I' not 100% sure > that checking for

[PATCH, testsuite]: check for weak support

paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-25 Paul Koning * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/attr-alias.c: Skip if no weak support. Index: testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/attr-alias.c === --- testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/attr-alias.c (revision 265404) +++ t

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] ignore some "conflicting types for built-in" messages

> On Nov 3, 2018, at 10:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 11/1/18 1:13 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> A number of test cases contain declarations like: >> void *memcpy(); >> which currently are silently accepted on most platforms but not on all; >> pdp11 (a

[PATCH, testsuite] add "inf" target attribute

ched patch implements this. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-11-01 Paul Koning * doc/sourcebuild.texi (target attributes): Document new "inf" effective target keyword. Index: doc/sourcebuild.texi ===

[PATCH, testsuite] test case fixes for pdp11

-01 Paul Koning * gcc.c-torture/execute/20010904-1.c: Align 2 if pdp11. * gcc.c-torture/execute/20010904-2.c: Ditto. * c-c++-common/builtin-arith-overflow-2.c: Skip if pdp11. * gcc.dg/Walloc-size-larger-than-4.c: Ditto. * gcc.dg/Walloc-size-larger-than-5.c

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] add "inf" target attribute

> On Nov 1, 2018, at 4:52 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Thu, 1 Nov 2018, Paul Koning wrote: > >> +@item inf >> +Target supports floating point infinite (@code{inf}). >> @end table > > Do you mean supports infinity for type double? (That's what the

[PATCH, testsuite] ignore some "conflicting types for built-in" messages

e the test cases where these occur are not looking for the message but are testing some other issue, so the message is not relevant. The attached patch adds dg-prune-output directives to do so. Ok for trunk? paul ChangeLog: 2018-11-01 Paul Koning * gcc.dg/Walloca-16

[PATCH] libgcc build fix for pdp11

This fixes some test suite failures due to a missing arithmetic support routine. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-11-01 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/t-pdp11 (LIB2ADD): Add divmod.c. (HOST_LIBGCC2_CFLAGS): Change to optimize for size. Index: config/pdp11/t-pdp11

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] test case fixes for pdp11

> On Nov 2, 2018, at 3:19 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > > Hi Paul, > >> This patch fixes a number of test case failures on pdp11. Some are too >> large for the address space, some have dependencies on the float format that >> don't match the DEC format, some add pdp11 to the targets that

Re: PR83750: CSE erf/erfc pair

> On Nov 5, 2018, at 1:48 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, 5 Nov 2018, Jeff Law wrote: > Don't we have a flag specific to honoring nans? Would that be better to use than flag_unsafe_math_optimizations? As Uli mentioned, there's >>> >>> That's only relevant for

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] ignore some "conflicting types for built-in" messages

> On Nov 5, 2018, at 11:45 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > >>> ... >> >> I can do that, but I'm wondering if some systems have different prototypes >> than the C standard calls for so I'd end up breaking those.I wouldn't worry >> about those. I think the bigger question (thanks > Martin) is whether

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] add "inf" target attribute

> On Nov 4, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 11/1/18 1:30 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> A number of test cases fail on pdp11 because they use the "inf" float value >> which does not exist on that target (nor on VAX). Rainer Orth and Joseph >> M

[PATCH, pdp11] Bugfixes from test suite

This patch corrects a large number of test suite failures. I'm now down to about 1100 failures out of over 60k total, from at least 4000 before. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-11-08 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/constraints.md: Add "Z" series constrain

Re: [PATCH 1/7][MSP430][TESTSUITE] Tweak dg-directives for msp430-elf

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 5:19 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz > wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2018 11:30:39 -0500 > Paul Koning wrote: > >>> On Nov 14, 2018, at 10:44 AM, Jozef Lawrynowicz >>> wrote: >>> >>> Patch 1 tweaks dg directives in tests spe

Ping: [PATCH, testsuite] ignore some "conflicting types for built-in" messages

Ping. I'd like to commit this. The discussion seems to have ended up with the conclusion that this is a reasonable approach. paul > On Nov 1, 2018, at 3:13 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > A number of test cases contain declarations like: > void *memcpy(); > which current

Re: [PATCH 1/7][MSP430][TESTSUITE] Tweak dg-directives for msp430-elf

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 10:44 AM, Jozef Lawrynowicz > wrote: > > Patch 1 tweaks dg directives in tests specifically for msp430. Many of > these are extensions to existing target selectors in dg directives. > > <0001-TESTSUITE-MSP430-Tweak-dg-directives-for-msp430-elf.patch> For pr41779.c,

Re: [PATCH 1/7][MSP430][TESTSUITE] Tweak dg-directives for msp430-elf

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 1:00 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz > wrote: > > On 14/11/2018 16:54, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> On Nov 14 2018, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote: >> >>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/torture/builtin-arith-overflow-10.c >>>

[PATCH, pdp11] Enable LRA for pdp11

for pointing out that LRA requires define_memory_constraint, while the old allocator is happy when memory operands use define_constraint. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-10-03 Paul Koning Enable LRA register allocator for PDP11. * config/pdp11/constraints.md (Q): Use

Re: [PATCH] middle-end/81035: Mention that noreturn suppresses tail call optimization

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 2:17 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Segher Boessenkool: > >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 12:59:27PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> 2018-09-21 Florian Weimer >>> >>> PR middle-end/81035 >>> * doc/extend.texi (Common Function Attributes): Mention that >>>

Re: [ping] Change static chain to r11 on aarch64

> On Dec 12, 2018, at 5:12 PM, Uecker, Martin > wrote: >> ... >> I've not seen such an alternative implementation (-fno-trampolines is >> ignored on all targets I tried), > > It was implemented for Ada. But here is a patch to also > activate it for C: > >

Re: [PATCH v4][C][ADA] use function descriptors instead of trampolines in C

> On Dec 17, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > On 17/12/2018 18:22, Uecker, Martin wrote: >>> >>> ... >> >> So a thread_local static variable for storing the static >> chain? > > something like that, but the more i think about it the > harder it seems: the call site of the nested

[PATCH, libgcc] Bug fix in udivmodhi4.c

This fixes a cut & paste oversight in udivmodhi4 (which is currently used only by the pdp11 target) reported by Stefan Kanthak. Committed as obvious. paul ChangeLog: 2018-12-05 Paul Koning * udivmodhi4.c (__udivmodhi4): Fix loop end check. Index: libgcc/udivmodh

[PATCH, pdp11] Fix 64 bit divide

This fixes a number of testsuite failures in pdp11. Committed. paul ChangeLog: 2018-11-25 Paul Koning * config/pdp11/pdp11.h (TARGET_HAS_NO_HW_DIVIDE): Define. Index: config/pdp11/pdp11.h === --- config/pdp11

[PATCH, testsuite] Fix pdp11 test failures

in this test. Committed. paul testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-11-19 Paul Koning * gcc.c-torture/execute/align-3.c: Skip if pdp11. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr23467.c: Ditto. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr36093.c: Ditto. * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr43783.c: Ditto

[PATCH, testsuite] indicate no "weak" support in pdp11

it's best to ask for approval. Ok for trunk? paul testsuite/ChangeLog: 2018-11-19 Paul Koning * lib/target-supports.exp (check_weak_available): Return "no" for pdp11. Index: lib/target-supports.exp ===

Re: [PATCH, testsuite] indicate no "weak" support in pdp11

> On Nov 19, 2018, at 5:20 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 11/19/18 3:18 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> This patch changes check_weak_available to report that pdp11 does not >> support "weak". A number of test case failures are caused by attempts to >> use weak

Re: [PATCH] PR880088 Enable -Wtrampolines for no-exec-stack targets with -Wall.

> On Nov 26, 2018, at 4:13 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > With -Wtrampolines a warning is produced whenever gcc generates executable > code on the stack at runtime to support taking a nested function address > that is used to call the nested function indirectly when it needs to access > any

Re: [RFC] Update Stage 4 description

> On Jan 9, 2019, at 3:42 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > > [ To revisit https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg00385.html ] > > The current formulation for the description of Stage 4 here ( > https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html ) is: > ... > During this period, the only (non-documentation)

Re: [PATCH 04/25] SPECIAL_REGNO_P

> On Sep 13, 2018, at 10:08 AM, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > On 13/09/18 11:01, Andrew Stubbs wrote: >> The assert is caused because the def-use chains indicate that SCC conflicts >> with itself. I suppose the question is why is it doing that, but it's >> probably do do with that being a

Re: [PATCH 04/25] SPECIAL_REGNO_P

> On Sep 13, 2018, at 10:39 AM, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > On 13/09/18 15:16, Paul Koning wrote: >> If you don't have machine operations that add without messing with >> condition codes, wouldn't it make sense to omit the definition of the >> add-pointer patterns?

Re: [PATCH 04/25] SPECIAL_REGNO_P

> On Sep 13, 2018, at 10:58 AM, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > On 13/09/18 15:49, Paul Koning wrote: >> It's ambiguous, because the last sentence of that paragraph says "addm3 is >> used if addptrm3 is not defined." > > I didn't read that as ambiguous; I rea

Re: [PATCH] correct maximum valid alignment in error message (PR 89812)

> On Mar 24, 2019, at 8:21 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: > > ... > PS I have a couple of questions related to the affected code: > 1) Does GCC support building with compilers where int is not 32 > bits wide, or where BITS_PER_UNIT is not 3? (I.e., either is > less or more?) Yes. pdp11 int can

Re: [PATCH] correct maximum valid alignment in error message (PR 89812)

> On Mar 25, 2019, at 12:07 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > >> ... >> 1) Does GCC support building with compilers where int is not 32 >>bits wide, or where BITS_PER_UNIT is not 3? (I.e., either is >>less or more?) > We've certainly supported 16 bit ints in the past. H8/300 would be an >

Re: [Contrib PATCH] Add scripts to convert GCC repo from SVN to Git

> On May 15, 2019, at 2:42 PM, Eric Gallager wrote: > >> ... > > Wasn't Eric S. Raymond working on his own conversion of the GCC repo > from SVN to Git? Whatever happened to his? Yes, and from what I recall he found that doing it fully correctly is an extremely hard task. It might be a

Re: [PATCH 21/30] Changes to pdp11

> On Jun 25, 2019, at 4:22 PM, acsaw...@linux.ibm.com wrote: > > From: Aaron Sawdey > > * config/pdp11/pdp11.md (movmemhi, movmemhi1, > movmemhi_nocc, UNSPEC_MOVMEM): Change movmem to cpymem. Ok, thanks. paul

Re: [PATCH][ARM] Correctly set SLOW_BYTE_ACCESS

> On Sep 11, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > > Contrary to all documentation, SLOW_BYTE_ACCESS simply means accessing > bitfields by their declared type, which results in better codegeneration > on practically any target. So set it correctly to 1 on Arm. If the documentation is

Re: Deprecating cc0 (and consequently cc0 targets)

> On Sep 20, 2019, at 1:45 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 9/20/19 11:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> ... >> It seems to be that for the goal to keep a target alive a variant #2 >> conversion (according to the wiki) should be closely mirror CC0 >> behavior and thus should be easier to achieve and

Re: [PATCH] regrename: Use PC instead of CC0 to hide operands

On Oct 1, 2019, at 5:14 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > The regrename pass temporarily changes some operand RTL to CC0 so that > note_stores and scan_rtx don't see those operands. CC0 is deprecated > and we want to remove it, so we need to use something else here. > PC fits the bill fine.

Re: Problem exposed by recent ARM multiply changes

> On Sep 26, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 9/26/19 9:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:39:31AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >>> Right. My point is that the multiplication patterns are an exception as >>> well. >> >> Do you have some evidence for that? > It's

Re: Deprecating cc0 (and consequently cc0 targets)

> On Oct 30, 2019, at 2:24 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 10/30/19 2:12 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 8:34 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >> >> I think the wiki has better examples. That said, I wonder how much can >> be automated here, for example when just considering CCmode

Re: [PATCH 3/4] Set costs for jumps in combine

> On Nov 21, 2019, at 7:42 PM, Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > ... > Maybe i386 should implement the insn_cost hook as well? For most targets > that is a lot simpler to get right than rtx_cost, but allowing memory in > many insns and all the different insn lengths complicates matters. At >

Re: [RFC] Characters per line: from punch card (80) to line printer (132) (was: [Patch][OpenMP/OpenACC/Fortran] Fix mapping of optional (present|absent) arguments)

> On Dec 5, 2019, at 11:17 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Dec 2019, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > >> In the relevant session at the GNU Tools Cauldron 2019, Michael Meissner >> stated that even he is not using a 80 x 24 terminal anymore, and that >> should tell us something. ;-) >> >>

Re: Fix ALL_REGS thinko in initialisation of function_used_regs

> On Oct 3, 2019, at 9:12 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > wrote: > > On 03/10/2019 10:48, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>> ... >> But ALL_REGS should contain *all* registers. The union of any two register >> classes has to be contained in some register class, so every register class >> has to

Re: [PATCH] Turn on LRA on all targets

> On May 15, 2023, at 5:09 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > ... > > I may choose to implement a non-DWARF unwinder instead, as the VAX stack > frame is always fully described by the hardware and there is never ever a > need for debug information to be able to decode any VAX stack frame

Re: [PATCH] Turn on LRA on all targets

> On Feb 16, 2024, at 6:34 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, Paul Koning wrote: > >>> On May 15, 2023, at 5:09 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: >>> >>> ... >>> >>> I may choose to implement a non-DWARF unwinder inste

  1   2   >