Upstreaming very old changes

2017-08-04 Thread coypu
Hi, GCC! I believe netbsd is the primary user of the vax target. its status is: good: netbsd uses gcc 5.4.0, and cross compiles its userland+kernel with this. it runs and is also able to natively build useful programs like perl. bad: -O0 in places, text relocations. obvious signs of more bugs

Internal compiler error building libstdc++ for vax

2018-03-15 Thread coypu
Hi folks, netbsd's copy of GCC differs enough that it fails elsewhere with gcc-trunk, but the problematic code is upstream. updating netbsd to gcc 6.4.0, I get an internal compiler error building libstdc++. (Long version: http://gnats.netbsd.org/53039) Short version: test.cc: In function 'bool

Re: Internal compiler error building libstdc++ for vax

2018-04-02 Thread coypu
It turns out (all from krister, I am still totally lost) that it is not failing for this specific reason in this case. Rather, the attached patch from krister fixes it, saying that gcc wants to change the label and then doesn't recognise the new insn thinking the memory_operand predicate is not

Re: Internal compiler error building libstdc++ for vax

2018-03-19 Thread coypu
(updating) krister found a better hack patch which explains what the problem is, adding a useless move at the end of the instruction, so the label is not the last instruction. (And, in the problem code, the last instruction in the function.) ---

syncing the GCC vax port

2019-03-30 Thread coypu
hi folks, i was interesting in tackling some problems gcc netbsd/vax has. it has some ICEs which are in reload phase. searching around, the answer to that is "switch to LRA first". Now, I don't quite know what that is yet, but I know I need to try to do it. As an initial step, I need to sync the

Re: syncing the GCC vax port

2019-03-31 Thread coypu
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 01:25:50PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > > > On Mar 30, 2019, at 5:03 AM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > > > hi folks, > > > > i was interesting in tackling some problems gcc netbsd/vax has. > > it has some ICEs which are in reload phase. searching around, the answer > > to

Re: Deprecate -traditional-cpp

2019-09-10 Thread coypu
Just chiming in. My buddy wrote a traditional C pre-processor for use with Imake (and, presumably, other old things). https://www.netbsd.org/~dholland/tradcpp/ (It's standalone).

Re: syncing the GCC vax port, atomic issue

2019-09-20 Thread coypu
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 03:45:46PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > Conditional branching patterns must support the label_ref and pc > operands in either position. Everything else I've seen on this thread > is just working around that broken aspect of the builtins.md file. > > > (define_insn "jbbssiqi"

Re: syncing the GCC vax port, atomic issue

2019-09-20 Thread coypu
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:15:32AM +, co...@sdf.org wrote: > Removed from the diff. Unfortunately this introduces an ICE during the > build of GCC... I took another look at the VAX atomic pattern issue. (http://gnats.netbsd.org/53039) It is a compiler crash to do with the added atomic

Re: syncing the GCC vax port, atomic issue

2019-09-20 Thread coypu
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 10:07:59PM +, co...@sdf.org wrote: > Introducing the reversed jbb* patterns doesn't seem to help with the > original issue. It crashes building libatomic. My loose understanding of what is going on: - GCC emits this atomic in expand. - When cleaning up, it looks for

Re: syncing the GCC vax port

2019-09-20 Thread coypu
Sorry for the delay... Updated diff: http://coypu.sdf.org/vax-gcc10.diff On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 02:08:32PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 3/30/19 3:03 AM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > hi folks, > > > > i was interesting in tackling some problems gcc netbsd/vax has. > > it has some ICEs which are in

[PATCH 1/1] [netbsd] when building shared, link against libc

2016-09-10 Thread coypu
--- gcc/config/netbsd.h | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/gcc/config/netbsd.h b/gcc/config/netbsd.h index f2d6cc6..65ce943 100644 --- a/gcc/config/netbsd.h +++ b/gcc/config/netbsd.h @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see %{!pg:-lposix}}

Re: Use a specfile that actually allows building programs on NetBSD

2017-01-11 Thread coypu
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:41:44PM +0100, Krister Walfridsson wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > >3 month ping, 1 week ping (trying again), etc... > > Apologies for not getting back to you sooner. > > > >Like most operating systems, NetBSD has a libc which contains > >stuff

Re: Use a specfile that actually allows building programs on NetBSD

2017-01-04 Thread coypu
Identical patch was committed to NetBSD in April 28, 2008. https://github.com/jsonn/src/commit/7105def538f68e0a0034f5c93ec7fc384ca849b2

Use a specfile that actually allows building programs on NetBSD

2017-01-04 Thread coypu
Like most operating systems, NetBSD has a libc which contains stuff it needs for most programs to work, and people expect it to be linked without explicitly specifying -lc. This patch is needed for just about any program to work. --- gcc/config/netbsd.h | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Re: Use a specfile that actually allows building programs on NetBSD

2017-01-09 Thread coypu
3 month ping, 1 week ping (trying again), etc... This patch has zero affect on non-netbsd users and was already accepted in NetBSD years ago. On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 11:24:27AM +, coypu wrote: > Like most operating systems, NetBSD has a libc which contains > stuff it needs for most pr

Re: [PATCH] Use a specfile that actually allows building programs on NetBSD

2017-06-29 Thread coypu
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 05:23:37PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 06/29/2017 09:51 AM, coypu wrote: > > I was thinking of holding a party for the upcoming one year anniversary > > of pinging this patch, that was committed to NetBSD's copy of GCC about > > a decade ago. withou

Re: [PATCH, VAX] Correct ffs instruction constraint

2017-06-29 Thread coypu
Ping. On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 08:05:42PM +, co...@sdf.org wrote: > VAX' FFS as variable-length bit field instruction uses a "base" > operand of type "vb" meaning "byte address". > "base" can be 32 bits (SI) and due to the definition of > ffssi2/__builtin_ffs() with the operand constraint "m",

[PATCH] Use a specfile that actually allows building programs on NetBSD

2017-06-29 Thread coypu
I was thinking of holding a party for the upcoming one year anniversary of pinging this patch, that was committed to NetBSD's copy of GCC about a decade ago. without it, I can't compile simple programs. --- gcc/config/netbsd.h | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Remove redundant definition of srcrootpre

2017-06-08 Thread coypu
I paid extra attention to it because it appeared in the last line of a build failure likely caused by shell tools differences. cd rarely outputs the new directory for me.

[PATCH, VAX] Correct ffs instruction constraint

2017-06-20 Thread coypu
VAX' FFS as variable-length bit field instruction uses a "base" operand of type "vb" meaning "byte address". "base" can be 32 bits (SI) and due to the definition of ffssi2/__builtin_ffs() with the operand constraint "m", code can be emitted which incorrectly implies a mode-dependent (= longword,

[PATCH 1/1] Remove redundant definition of srcrootpre

2017-06-05 Thread coypu
This script has the only occurrence of it, and in this line it defines and exports it. --- config-ml.in | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/config-ml.in b/config-ml.in index 47f153350..58c80a35c 100644 --- a/config-ml.in +++ b/config-ml.in @@ -493,7 +493,6 @@ multi-do:

Re: Fix inconsistent section flags

2017-08-22 Thread coypu
ping

Re: [PATCH, alpha] Move linux-specific specfile definitions to linux.h

2017-10-24 Thread coypu
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:13:52AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > So we can't depend on patches that OpenBSD applies. What's important is > what is in the official GCC sources. > > I'd like to see some discussion about what these macros should look like > for the *bsd ports. Merely removing them from

Re: [PATCH] PR target/85904: Fix configure when cross compiling for netbsd

2018-05-24 Thread coypu
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 06:31:25PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 24/05/18 16:14 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 24/05/18 13:14 +, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > > In the past I was asked to post bugzilla patches here. I am doing this. > > > It fixes a build failure. > > > > > > PR

Re: [PATCH, alpha] PR target/85095

2018-05-24 Thread coypu
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:48:22PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 05/24/2018 07:54 AM, Maya Rashish wrote: > > Move linux-specific specfile definitions to linux.h > > gcc/config/alpha/linux.h (STARTFILE_SPEC, ENDFILE_SPEC) move from > > alpha/elf.h > > --- > > gcc/config/alpha/elf.h | 26

[PATCH] PR target/85904: Fix configure when cross compiling for netbsd

2018-05-24 Thread coypu
In the past I was asked to post bugzilla patches here. I am doing this. It fixes a build failure. PR target/85904 libstdc++-v3/crossconfig.m4: test for aligned_alloc on netbsd libstdc++-v3/configure: Regenerate Attached is patch. >From ac7a1f364b0ca5e3a6a5a68a16266d1cb78ee5da Mon Sep 17 00:00:00

Re: [PATCH, alpha] PR target/85095

2018-05-24 Thread coypu
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 01:32:17PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 05/24/2018 01:17 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:48:22PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > >> On 05/24/2018 07:54 AM, Maya Rashish wrote: > >>> Move linux-specific specfile definitions to linux.h > >>>

Re: [PATCH, alpha] PR target/85095

2018-06-17 Thread coypu
Ping. Anything else to do for this? Thanks.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Untangle stddef.h a little

2018-06-19 Thread coypu
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 03:31:55PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Sun, 4 Feb 2018, Maya Rashish wrote: > > > Of the currently supported BSDs: > > - FreeBSD, doesn't have ansi.h or define _MACHINE_ANSI_H anywhere > > in its other headers since the long-gone 5.x release. > > - OpenBSD,

[PATCH 2/2] Simplify: combine cases for dfly+fbsd with vms.

2018-02-03 Thread coypu
No need to have VMS in a separate elif case and a separate comment for it saying the same thing. No functional change intended. --- gcc/ginclude/stddef.h | 7 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/ginclude/stddef.h b/gcc/ginclude/stddef.h index

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Untangle stddef.h a little

2018-02-12 Thread coypu
ping, let me know if there is anything wrong with it.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Untangle stddef.h a little

2018-02-19 Thread coypu
ping they're good patches. ask questions. I have more.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Untangle stddef.h a little

2018-02-28 Thread coypu
hi gcc-patches, as part of pinging, i'll explain the story of this patch. I want to make sure all netbsd archs work with upstream gcc. in this case, netbsd/arm's EABI support. I try to break up my changes into digestible chunks that are rational, which is why this change came first. building

Re: [PATCH] Default to an ARM cpu that exists

2018-10-22 Thread coypu
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 03:56:24PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > I think strongarm would be a better choice. I'm not aware of anyone > running NetBSD on Arm8 cpus. Clarifying: this is the global default for all GCC ARM targets, not just netbsd. Is strongarm still the preferred choice?

Re: [PATCH] Default to an ARM cpu that exists

2018-10-22 Thread coypu
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 03:56:24PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > I think strongarm would be a better choice. I'm not aware of anyone > running NetBSD on Arm8 cpus. > > Otherwise, this is fine with a suitable ChangeLog entry. > > R. I hope this is OK. Thanks! Maya Rashish PR

[PATCH] Default to an ARM cpu that exists

2018-10-20 Thread coypu
Regarding target/86383, it wasn't sufficient to not just pick arm6 for netbsd, as the default -mcpu is still arm6, which also fails to build. I assume the default is expected to be the oldest support, and I think now that's arm8, so maybe default to that. diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc

Re: [PATCH] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2018-10-24 Thread coypu
Thanks for the detailed response. Sorry to give only a partial reply. On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 02:36:57PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > Thanks for posting this. Before we can commit it, however, we need to > sort out the authorship and ensure that all the appropriate copyright >

[PATCH v2] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2018-10-31 Thread coypu
Thanks for the feedback. I made some improvements. Changes from the first patch: config.gcc: need_64bit_hwint=yes No longer needed resolve conflict from strongarm being default for netbsd. switch default cpu for armv7--netbsdelf-eabi: cortex-a8 -> generic-armv7-a, (make -mfpu=auto pick VFPv3-D16)

Re: [PATCH v2] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2018-10-31 Thread coypu
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:23:27PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > On 31/10/2018 14:10, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > + > > +# Currently there is a bug somewhere in GCC's alias analysis > > +# or scheduling code that is breaking _fpmul_parts in fp-bit.c. > > +# Disabling function inlining is a

Re: [PATCH v2] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2018-11-02 Thread coypu
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 11:04:06AM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > Sorry about that. You don't really expect me to remember every patch I > committed 18 years ago! > > And pedantically, that was a branch merge patch. The original commit > (back in the CVS days) was: > > > revision

[PATCH] Fix PIE on netbsd (PR target/87221)

2018-11-09 Thread coypu
Re-sending because my patch doesn't seem to appear on the archive This matches to what netbsd is doing with its own copy of GCC, it can be simpler. PR target/87221: config/netbsd-elf.h (NETBSD_STARTFILE_SPEC): use crtbeginS.o for PIE (NETBSD_ENDFILE_SPEC): use crtendS.o for PIE ---

[PATCH] Fix extra parens in config/tls.m4

2018-09-03 Thread coypu
Hi folks, This typo meant that HAVE_CC_TLS wasn't added to confdefs.h. We run a potentially questionable setup where we save the results of running configure for every architecture and then use it in subsequent builds for reliability. the addition of -DHAVE_CC_TLS wasn't saved to confdefs, so

Re: [PATCH,GDC] Add netbsd support to GDC

2019-01-23 Thread coypu
(Oops, added the wrong email out of habit to the first reply :-)) On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 08:37:25PM +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote: > > diff --git a/gcc/d/d-builtins.cc b/gcc/d/d-builtins.cc > > index b0a315a3ed9..ca105c7635d 100644 > > --- a/gcc/d/d-builtins.cc > > +++ b/gcc/d/d-builtins.cc > > @@

[PATCH] Provide early warning about configure failure

2018-12-08 Thread coypu
Hi folks, I was bitten by this, and it seemed like a few people online had similar issues (for example https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65794). We run a configure script from another configure script, to generate auto-build.h. Secondary configure might fail. This failure isn't

Re: [PATCH] Fix extra parens in config/tls.m4

2018-09-16 Thread coypu
ping. I can provide a less scary patch to correct the typo if people are afraid of the cleanup changes.

Re: [PATCH] Fix extra parens in config/tls.m4

2018-09-16 Thread coypu
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 01:00:21PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Sep 03 2018, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > > config/tls.m4: Remove extra parentheses > > There are no extra parentheses. > For the benefit of the discussion, I've added the more minimal version of the patch. This is a weird

Re: [PATCH] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2019-03-20 Thread coypu
More pings! On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 09:56:05AM +, co...@sdf.org wrote: > Ping. > > Link for possible convenience :-) > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg01899.html

[PATCH, wwwdocs] Update on existence of free emulators for alpha, VAX

2019-03-31 Thread coypu
As far as I can tell, alpha can be emulated by QEMU. VAX has SIMH. (Perhaps I should mention it somewhere? :)) Index: backends.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/backends.html,v retrieving revision 1.84 diff -u -r1.84

[PATCH] claim ifunc support on several NetBSD architectures

2019-04-07 Thread coypu
architecture list from netbsd src/tests/libexec/ld.elf_so/t_ifunc.c (quick reference: https://github.com/NetBSD/src/blob/trunk/tests/libexec/ld.elf_so/t_ifunc.c#L38 ) tested on netbsd/amd64. ifuncs worked anyway, but I can't use target_clones without this change. that is one very cool feature

[PATCH] netbsd EABI support

2019-04-08 Thread coypu
Pinging again in the hope of getting the patch in, I'd like to have less outstanding patches :) (I have quite a few and new releases can become painful!) gcc/ChangeLog config.gcc (arm*-*-netbsdelf*) Add support for EABI configuration config.host (arm*-*-netbsd*): Build driver-arm.o

Re: [PATCH] claim ifunc support on several NetBSD architectures

2019-04-08 Thread coypu
Small addition for ARM. Since it doesn't have a geneirc way to detect CPU features the code in libatomic relies on a linux-specific behaviour, the ifunc condition is only defined for linux. To unbreak compilation, I'd like to exclude netbsd/arm from the libatomic ifunc camp :)

Re: [PATCH] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2019-02-24 Thread coypu
support for EABI configuration config/arm/t-netbsd: LIB1ASMFUNCS: Append to existing set. HOST_LIBGCC2_CFLAGS: workaround possible bug config/arm/t-netbsd-eabi: New file. >From c138b94b036e1485ed71c57966894e80f84fea1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: coypu Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2

Re: [PATCH] bring netbsd/arm support up to speed. eabi, etc.

2019-03-08 Thread coypu
Ping. Link for possible convenience :-) https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-02/msg01899.html

Re: [PATCH,GDC] Add netbsd support to GDC

2019-02-11 Thread coypu
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 09:35:03AM +, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > Is this necessary? I'd prefer to not set this field if it can be > > avoided. The same goes for the others, I intend to remove them at > > soonest convenience once the problematic parts of the front-end logic > > has been

[patch][aarch64] add netbsd/aarch64 target

2019-06-14 Thread coypu
Hi folks, This patch adds support for netbsd/aarch64. It would be nice to have it committed, please tell me if anything is wrong. Thanks. Matthew Green Maya Rashish gcc: * config.gcc (aarch64*-*-netbsd*): New target. * config/aarch64/aarch64-netbsd.h: New file. *

[patch] Add NetBSD/hppa target

2019-06-14 Thread coypu
This adds netbsd/hppa support. I tested it on the shiny new QEMU-git which can now boot NetBSD too :-) Files are very similar to the linux code. Please let me know if any changes need to be made. Matt Thomas Nick Hudson Matthew Green Maya Rashish gcc/ChangeLog: config.gcc

Re: [patch] Add NetBSD/hppa target

2019-06-25 Thread coypu
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 01:32:11PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > >> +hppa*-*-netbsd*) > >> + target_cpu_default="MASK_PA_11|MASK_NO_SPACE_REGS" > > Any reason to not use the PA 2.0 ISA? I'm virtually certain we > > supported the 32bit ABI running on PA 2.0 hardware in hpbsd (which is > >

[PATCH, wwwdocs] Update on existence of free emulators

2019-06-13 Thread coypu
pinging this with more changes: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-03/msg01471.html S A Free simulator does not exist. HPPA and alpha are supported by QEMU. https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/HPPA https://wiki.qemu.org/Documentation/Platforms/Alpha VAX is supported by SIMH.

Re: [PATCH] netbsd EABI support

2019-06-12 Thread coypu
I think copyright assignment is done. Thanks for bearing with me. I noticed the version I submitted in April is missing some changes we discussed on October 2018. I took the patch from then and removed -matpcs too, the unnecessary change to libgcc t-netbsd (which is the OABI configuration

[PATCH, netbsd] Give a name to the number 0 in sysarch(0, ...)

2019-06-19 Thread coypu
The definition originates in https://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src/sys/arch/arm/include/sysarch.h#58 I've added the prefix SYSARCH to avoid any naming conflict concerns. It looked a bit like an error on a first impression :-) * config/arm/netbsd-elf.h (SYSARCH_ARM_SYNC_ICACHE): New definition.

Re: [PATCH] netbsd EABI support

2019-05-09 Thread coypu
On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 05:36:47PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > > So we're well into stage4 which means technically it's too late for > > something like this. However, given it's limited scope I won't object > > if the ARM port maintainers want to go forward. Otherwise I'll queue it

Re: [PATCH] netbsd EABI support

2019-05-23 Thread coypu
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 05:11:30PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > On 23/05/2019 17:01, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > > On 23/05/2019 15:11, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > >> On 23/05/2019 15:03, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > >>> On 20/05/2019 20:24, Jeff Law wrote: > On

Re: [PATCH] netbsd EABI support

2019-05-10 Thread coypu
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:44:28AM +0100, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > I was hoping to get a comment from one of the netbsd port maintainers on > the changes to the common NetBSD code. Are they no-longer active? Jason Thorpe said he can't contribute to GCC because of where he works. Krister

[PR target/85401] initialize the move cost table before using it

2019-09-14 Thread coypu
This seems to be the way the rest of ira-color.c does it. I hope it's OK. It does fix the segfault. 2019-09-10 Maya Rashish PR target/85401 * ira-color.c: (allocno_copy_cost_saving) Call ira_init_register_move_cost_if_necessary diff --git a/gcc/ira-color.c

[PATCH target/86811] Mark VAX as not needing speculation barriers

2019-09-17 Thread coypu
According to Bob Supnik (who is a very authoritative source on VAX), > Funny you should ask. The short answer is no. No VAX ever did > speculative or out of order execution. As such, marking VAX as not needing speculation barriers. PR target/86811 * config/vax/vax.c

[ping][PR target/85401] initialize the move cost table before using it

2019-09-28 Thread coypu
re-posting, now CC'ing vmakarov who might be the right person to ping about issues in this file. apologies for the noise if I'm wrong. -- This seems to be the way the rest of ira-color.c does it. I hope it's OK. It does fix the segfault. 2019-09-10 Maya Rashish PR target/85401

Re: Deprecating cc0 (and consequently cc0 targets)

2019-09-22 Thread coypu
On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 09:38:38AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > this time -- removals would happen during the gcc-11 cycle. Hi Jeff, I'm concerned that if I don't reach this milestone for VAX, it'll mean that future code review will require justifying some of the original changes which is getting

Re: [ping][PR target/85401] initialize the move cost table before using it

2019-09-30 Thread coypu
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:46:24AM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > Yes, the patch is mostly ok.  You can commit it into the trunk after > applying changes mentioned below. If you do not have a write access, let me > know I'll commit the patch by myself. I don't have commit access. It would be

Re: [PR target/85401][v2] Add test-cases

2019-10-10 Thread coypu
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 09:41:35AM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr85401-2.c > > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr85401-2.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000..1d68d0b > > ---

[PR target/85401][v2] Add test-cases

2019-10-09 Thread coypu
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 02:28:55PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 10/4/19 1:43 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 01:26:16PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > >> On 9/30/19 2:45 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > >>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:46:24AM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > Yes, the

[PR target/85401] initialize the move cost table before using it (in another place, too)

2019-10-04 Thread coypu
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 01:26:16PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 9/30/19 2:45 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:46:24AM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > >> Yes, the patch is mostly ok.  You can commit it into the trunk after > >> applying changes mentioned below. If you do not

[PR target/85401] Add test-cases

2019-10-04 Thread coypu
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 01:26:16PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 9/30/19 2:45 PM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:46:24AM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > >> Yes, the patch is mostly ok.  You can commit it into the trunk after > >> applying changes mentioned below. If you do not

[Bug libgcc/77470] libssp may have bad includes

2016-09-05 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77470 --- Comment #1 from coypu --- Created attachment 39560 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39560=edit Correct includes for libssp This gets me a bit further, but I still have trouble using it. For netbsd we have in stdi

[Bug c/77480] New: netbsd specfile will not link against libc when building -shared

2016-09-05 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 39557 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39557=edit less bogus specfile for netbsd. Attached a patch tha

[Bug libgcc/77470] New: libssp may have bad includes

2016-09-04 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- apologies if this is invalid for vanilla GCC, I am very skeptical I will be able to build it without the help of a package, which includes small changes. configuring with --enable-libssp, I got

[Bug bootstrap/77800] New: Undefined ref to host_detect_local_cpu on netbsd/arm

2016-09-29 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Component: bootstrap Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Hello, Building GCC 5.4.0 on netbsd 7.0.1 armv6hf I encounter failure like: gcc.o:(.rodata+0x58c4): undefined reference to `host_detect_local_cpu(int, char const**)' I

[Bug bootstrap/77774] New: Build failure on netbsd-7.0.1/arm6hf of gcc 6.2.0, 7-20160925

2016-09-28 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 39716 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39716=edit Errors in the build Attached errors from the bu

[Bug bootstrap/77774] Build failure on netbsd-7.0.1/arm6hf of gcc 6.2.0, 7-20160925

2016-09-28 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4 --- Comment #4 from coypu --- indeed in EXTRAOBJS I only have netbsd.o I'll try to use arm*) instead, and will report back.

[Bug bootstrap/77774] Build failure on netbsd-7.0.1/arm6hf of gcc 6.2.0, 7-20160925

2016-09-28 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4 --- Comment #6 from coypu --- It is a local change bug! thanks. I'll let you know if the build completes.

[Bug c/78927] New: implicit-fallthrough is very picky about FALLTHROUGH comment location

2016-12-25 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Priority: P3 Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- This is the (currently latest) 20161218 snapshot. int main() { int num = 3; int a; switch (num

[Bug libstdc++/81353] New: Please provide a libstdc++ version macro

2017-07-07 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- occasionally workarounds are needed for old libstdc++ versions, it would be easier to do so with the help of a macro. if the compiler used is not GCC, we can't check for GCC's

[Bug c/80685] New: -Wnonnull-compare warns based on builtin declaration

2017-05-08 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Component: c Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Hi, I'm building a libc. It doesn't use __attribute__((nonnull)) anywhere in stdio.h and other headers, instead asserts in a convoluted way that the arguments aren't NULL

[Bug libgcc/81199] fallback definition of count_leading_zeros references hidden symbol

2017-06-25 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81199 --- Comment #2 from coypu --- To relay a comment on the netbsd bug, "I don't think (the proposed idea) is correct and the real problem is that we are linking libgcc first (again)."

[Bug libgcc/81199] fallback definition of count_leading_zeros references hidden symbol

2017-06-24 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81199 --- Comment #1 from coypu --- Maybe expose __clz_tab but only in the fallback definition case, and not make it hidden.

[Bug libgcc/81199] New: fallback definition of count_leading_zeros references hidden symbol

2017-06-24 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Priority: P3 Component: libgcc Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Bug report from building cmake on netbsd/vax with GCC 5.4.0 http://gnats.netbsd.org/52326 [ 88%] Building CXX object Source/CMakeFiles

[Bug target/80600] hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

2017-05-03 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600 --- Comment #3 from coypu --- $ /usr/pkg/gcc7/bin/gfortran -Wl,--verbose test.f95 |grep succeeded |sort -u .. attempt to open /usr/lib/crt0.o succeeded attempt to open /usr/lib/crtbegin.o succeeded attempt to open /usr/lib/crtend.o succeeded

[Bug target/80600] hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

2017-05-02 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600 --- Comment #1 from coypu --- Related and possible duplicate for dfly: libgcc/61309

[Bug target/80600] New: hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

2017-05-02 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- building a simple fortran hello world: /usr/bin/ld: a.out: hidden symbol `__cpu_model' in /usr/pkg/gcc7/lib/gcc/x86_64--netbsd/7.1.0/libgcc.a(cpuinfo.o) is referenced by DSO

[Bug target/80600] hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

2017-05-04 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600 --- Comment #10 from coypu --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #9) > > This may break Linux. You may want to investigate if this approach: > > commit 6e6c7fc1e15525a10f48d4f5ac2edd853e2f5cb7 > Author: nsz <nsz@138bc

[Bug target/80600] hidden symbol `__cpu_model' is referenced by DSO

2017-05-04 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80600 --- Comment #8 from coypu --- Created attachment 41317 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41317=edit Unbreak NetBSD following r243219 This patch works for me.

[Bug c/82068] wrong double to uint64_t conversion with -mieee

2017-09-01 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82068 --- Comment #2 from coypu --- Created attachment 42103 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42103=edit -mieee, asserts

[Bug c/82068] wrong double to uint64_t conversion with -mieee

2017-09-01 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82068 --- Comment #3 from coypu --- Created attachment 42104 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42104=edit -mieee -mfp-trap-mode=n, doesn't assert

[Bug target/82068] wrong double to uint64_t conversion with -mieee

2017-09-01 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82068 coypu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug c/82068] wrong double to uint64_t conversion with -mieee

2017-09-01 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82068 --- Comment #4 from coypu --- sorry, I attached an object file rather than assembly. I am guessing it's good enough. I am passing only -mieee to make it fail. (If I use instead -mieee -mfp-trap-mode=n, it doesn't fail, and I get a very similar

[Bug c/82068] New: wrong double to uint64_t conversion with -mieee

2017-08-31 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- background: gcc 8.0.0 20170827 netbsd-8.99.2/alpha, 21264 the following test case asserts if built with -mieee, but not without: #include #include #include int main (void

[Bug target/83302] New: i386 stack_probe has side effects

2017-12-06 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- stack_probe on x86 is "or 0 offset(%rsp)". it's not a no-op because it isn't atomic. Related: https://github.com/golang/go/issues/20427 https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/10/188 https:/

[Bug libstdc++/85904] New: configure issue cross compiling on netbsd, with patch

2018-05-24 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Component: libstdc++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 44175 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44175=edit Fixes configure for me Out of the box (+3 patches I would like to get merged

[Bug target/85905] New: cannot build for netbsd/alpha (with patch)

2018-05-24 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: coypu at sdf dot org Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 44176 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44176=edit move linux specfile stuff to linux file. when I build trunk I get in libgomp/config.log can

[Bug target/85905] cannot build for netbsd/alpha (with patch)

2018-06-18 Thread coypu at sdf dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85905 coypu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution

  1   2   >