Context dependent expression simplification

2014-01-14 Thread Paulo Matos
Hello, Before I start to write code to reinvent the wheel, I would like to know if there's something already out there to do context dependent expression simplification. What I need is to simplify an expression at a given point in a BB. For example: bb2: r1 <- 2 if r2 != 0 goto bb3 els

Re: Context dependent expression simplification

2014-01-14 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 01:40:36PM +, Paulo Matos wrote: > Before I start to write code to reinvent the wheel, I would like to know if > there's something already out there to do context dependent expression > simplification. > What I need is to simplify an expression at a given point in a BB

RE: Context dependent expression simplification

2014-01-14 Thread Paulo Matos
> -Original Message- > From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com] > Sent: 14 January 2014 13:45 > To: Paulo Matos > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: Context dependent expression simplification > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 01:40:36PM +, Paulo Matos wrote: > > Before I start to write

Re: [Ping, IRA] Segfault in ira_costs.c:find_costs_and_classes for AVR target

2014-01-14 Thread Vladimir Makarov
On 01/13/2014 03:54 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > Ping ! > > Regards > Senthil > > On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 03:11:25PM +0530, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: >> Hi, >> >> gcc.c-torture/compile/pr34856.c and a couple of other tests segfault >> for the AVR target. Looking at the code, I found

Re: [IRA] Segfault in ira_costs.c:find_costs_and_classes for AVR target

2014-01-14 Thread Vladimir Makarov
On 12/26/2013 04:41 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote: > Hi, > > gcc.c-torture/compile/pr34856.c and a couple of other tests segfault > for the AVR target. Looking at the code, I found that the > x_ira_register_move_cost array[TImode] is NULL, while the code goes on > to dereference it (ira

Re: PATCH: PR ld/16428: Disallow -shared/-pie, -shared/-static, -pie/-static

2014-01-14 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Cary Coutant wrote: > >> I see no reason why "-static -pie" should not work. "-static" does >> *not* specify the type of output directly. "-static" chooses input >> objects. "-pie" affects output. The two options are logically >> orthogonal. You ought to be a

Re: PATCH: PR ld/16428: Disallow -shared/-pie, -shared/-static, -pie/-static

2014-01-14 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote: > When there is -static, -dynamic-linker won't passed to ld. -static, > -shared, -pie should be mutually exclusive for GCC driver. A static PIE shouldn't specify an interpreter; it should handle all dynamic relocation processing itself. Thus, it's correct no

Re: PATCH: PR ld/16428: Disallow -shared/-pie, -shared/-static, -pie/-static

2014-01-14 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> When there is -static, -dynamic-linker won't passed to ld. -static, >> -shared, -pie should be mutually exclusive for GCC driver. > > A static PIE shouldn't specify an interpreter; it should handle

Re: PATCH: PR ld/16428: Disallow -shared/-pie, -shared/-static, -pie/-static

2014-01-14 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Joseph S. Myers > wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > >> When there is -static, -dynamic-linker won't passed to ld. -static, > >> -shared, -pie should be mutually exclusive for GCC driver. > > > > A static P

Re: PATCH: PR ld/16428: Disallow -shared/-pie, -shared/-static, -pie/-static

2014-01-14 Thread H.J. Lu
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Joseph S. Myers >> wrote: >> > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > >> >> When there is -static, -dynamic-linker won't passed to ld. -static, >> >> -shared, -p