Hi.
I want to share some of my thoughts and doings on improving / cleaning
up current GCC instruction scheduler (Haifa) - most of them are just
small obvious improvements.
I have semi-ready patches for about a half of them and would appreciate
any early suggestion or comments on the following dr
Vladimir N. Makarov wrote:
Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
Hi.
I want to share some of my thoughts and doings on improving / cleaning
up current GCC instruction scheduler (Haifa) - most of them are just
small obvious improvements.
I have semi-ready patches for about a half of them and would appreciate
Diego Novillo wrote:
Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote on 03/05/07 02:14:
o Fix passes that invalidate tree-ssa alias export.
Yes, this should be good and shouldn't need a lot of work.
o { Fast but unsafe Gupta's aliasing patch, Unsafe tree-ssa alias
export } in scheduler's d
Steven Bosscher wrote:
On 4/16/07, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
29841 [4.2/4.3 regression] ICE with scheduling and __builtin_trap
Honza, PING!
There is a patch for this PR29841 in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-02/msg01134.html . The problem
is that I don't really know
Hi,
The feedback in this thread was overall positive with good suggestions
on implementation details. I'm starting to work on the first draft,
and plan to post something in 2-4 weeks.
Thanks.
On 28 May 2015 at 11:39, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Akashi-san and I have b
nd it a bit painful to maintain.
>
> Any comments are welcome.
I have also investigated several races on I/O in the gfortran testsuite, and my
preference is to go with [1]. Specifically, if a fortran test does I/O with
filenames that can clash with some other test, then the test should be located
in a sub-directory of gfortran.dg testsuite that runs its test in-order.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
one elaborate on this? Was it just empirically noticed on x86_64?
+ Richard Sandiford who wrote SCHED_PRESSURE_MODEL
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
gisters when there are a lot of instructions
in the ready list.
Charles, can you finish your patch in the next several days and post it for
review?
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
ed in going to
GSoC Reunion, please let me know.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
On May 17, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Tobias Grosser wrote:
>
>
> On 17/05/2014 00:27, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> Hi Community,
>>
>> The community bonding period is coming to a close, students can officially
>> start coding on Monday, May 19th.
>>
>> In t
the period June
23-27.
For evaluations, you might find this guide helpful:
http://en.flossmanuals.net/GSoCMentoring/evaluations/ .
On another note, copyright assignments are now completed for 4 out of 5
students. I have pinged the last student to get his assignment in order.
--
Maxi
ldron!
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
P_CON/DEP_PRO correct? (or, at least, consistent
> with other gcc developers' views on the matter :)) My patch kit [2] has
> this expressed in the type system as of [3], so if I'm incorrect about
> this I'd prefer to know ASAP.
Yes, it is correct.
>
> Simila
elegates to the GSoC Reunion un-conference
this year -- sponsored by Google.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
GSoC Mentors and Students,
Please remember that the deadline for final evaluations is August 22 19:00UTC.
Both mentors and students should submit their evaluations on GSoC website [*]
by that time.
So far we have only 2 evaluations (out of 10) submitted.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
few people, and there are good comments and thoughts there that deserve
a wider audience.
Thank you, [your friendly GSoC admin signing off]
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
On Nov 14, 2014, at 9:00 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 5:08 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
>> appointed Maxim Kuvyrkov as reviewer for the Android sub-port.
>>
>>Please join me
Hi Thomas,
Tobias will be GSoC admin for GCC this year. He has submitted GSoC application
today.
Tobias, would you please CC gcc@ for future GSoC-related news and updates?
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
> On Feb 19, 2015, at 11:11 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
> H
t SVN branches
to see it).
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
stinct is to stick with a single option for
now, since we can always add more later.
[2] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-May/346905.html
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
> On May 28, 2015, at 11:59 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>
> On May 28, 2015 10:39:27 AM GMT+02:00, Maxim Kuvyrkov
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Akashi-san and I have been discussing required GCC changes to make
>> kernel's livepatching work for AArch6
hers feel that slipping a few days (but not weeks) would make
> things significantly easier.
The timetable looks entirely reasonable to me.
I have regenerated my primary version this week, and it's up at
https://git.linaro.org/people/maxim-kuvyrkov/gcc-pretty.git/ . So far I have
received
#x27;t want to convert some of the branches or tags to git, then
we should delete them from SVN repository before conversion.
Otherwise it will (a) complicate comparison or repos converted by different
tools, and (b) will require us to remember why parts of SVN history were not
converted to g
gt; e) other general development branches in refs/{heads/tags}/devt
>>
>> What does this mean? "other", "general"?
>
> Anything that's not vendor/user specific and not a release - a topic
> branch most likely
>>
>>> That probably means the
> On Sep 19, 2019, at 6:34 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
>> On Sep 17, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
>> wrote:
>>
>> At the Cauldron this weekend the overwhelming view for the move to GIT soon
>> was finally expressed.
>>
> ...
>&g
velopers have expressed the same view:
1. all we care about is history of trunk and recent release branches
2. current gcc-mirror is really all we need
3. having vendor branches and author info would be nice, but not so nice as to
delay the switch any longer
Granted, the above is not the /offic
27;t
looked at this in depth.
Q4: Is it possible to integrate Richard E.'s script to rewrite commit log
messages?
A5: Yes, absolutely. The scripts have a pass to rewrite commit
author/committer entries, and log rewrite easily fits in there. It would be
very helpful to have a version of Richard's script that runs on per-commit
basis, suitable for "git filter-branch" consumption.
Regards,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
onfigure: Regenerate.
* configure.in: Likewise.
* Makefile.in: Likewise.
* src/Makefile.in: Likewise.
* libsup++/Makefile.in: Likewise.
* po/Makefile.in: Likewise.
* doc/Makefile.in: Likewise.
Legacy-ID: 138087
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
gcc-reparent beyond r195087.
So, while we are evaluating the conversion candidates, it is best to disable
conversion features that cause hard-to-workaround differences.
>
> I'll do another GCC conversion run to pick up all the accumulated fixes
> and improvements (including many more PR whitelist entries / fixes in
> Richard's script), once another ChangeLog-related fix is in.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
s ===
Reposurgeon-6a conversion uses default "@gcc.gnu.org" emails for many commits
where svn-git conversion manages to extract valid email from commit data. This
happens for hundreds of author entries.
Regards,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
> On Dec 26, 2019, at 7:11
he SVN commit touched more than one SVN branch or
> tag and so has to be split to represent it in git (there are about 1500
> such SVN commits, most of them automatic datestamp updates in the CVS era
> that cvs2svn turned into mixed-branch commits).
Thanks for catching this. This is fallout from incremental rebuilds (rather
than fresh builds) of gcc-reparent repository. Incremental builds take about
1h and full rebuilds take about 30h. I'll switch to doing full rebuilds.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
> On Dec 30, 2019, at 1:24 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> wrote:
>
> On 29/12/2019 18:30, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> Below are several more issues I found in reposurgeon-6a conversion comparing
>> it against gcc-reparent conversion.
>>
>> I am sure, these an
> On Dec 30, 2019, at 6:31 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> wrote:
>
> On 30/12/2019 13:00, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>>> On Dec 30, 2019, at 1:24 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29/12/2019 18:30, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>>>
> On Dec 30, 2019, at 7:08 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
> wrote:
>
> On 30/12/2019 15:49, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>>> On Dec 30, 2019, at 6:31 PM, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 30/12/2019 13:00, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>>&g
ions and will post my
results later today.
Unfortunately, the comparison is complicated by the fact that you uploaded only
"b" version of gcc-reposurgeon-8 repository, which uses modified branch layout
(or confirm that there are no substantial differences between "7" and "8"
reposurgeon conversions).
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
https://www.linaro.org
> On Jan 10, 2020, at 10:33 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov
> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 9, 2020, at 5:38 AM, Segher Boessenkool
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 11:34:32PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>> As noted on overseers, once Saturday's DATESTAMP
> On Jan 10, 2020, at 6:15 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2020, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
>> To me this looks like cherry-picks of r182541 and r182547 from
>> redhat/gcc-4_7-branch into redhat/gcc-4_8-branch.
>
> r182541 is the first commit on /branch
akes several loads so had to modify some more
>> patterns. Anyway, regardless of the proper fix, do you have any objection
>> to raising a CVE for that issue?
>
> Please file a bug in Bugzilla first and use that in the submission to
> MITRE.
Thomas filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
> On Apr 29, 2018, at 2:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Maxim Kuvyrkov:
>
>>> On Apr 28, 2018, at 9:22 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>
>>> * Thomas Preudhomme:
>>>
>>>> Yes absolutely, CSE needs to be avoided. I made memory acces
ipa-cp.c to
clearly describe the type information lattice [*]. Having information
represented as lattice is advantageous as it makes it easier to reuse
devirtualization analysis in other optimization passes.
[*] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-12/msg00461.html
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
+7-812-677-6839
two instructions into one, but fails. This causes an
extra 'add' instruction per switch statement in the final assembly. The target
I'm working with is MIPS, but, I imagine, other architectures are affected as
well.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery / Mentor Graphics
On 2/12/2011, at 9:45 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 03:33:06PM +1300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> I'm looking at a missed optimizations in combine and it is similar to the
>> one you've fixed in PR18942
>> (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.pa
Andrew Stubbs wrote:
I'm having trouble with an ICE, and I'm hoping somebody can enlighten me.
Given the following command:
cc1 -fpreprocessed ../pr34330.i -quiet -dumpbase pr34330.c -da -mb
-auxbase-strip pr34330.c -Os -version -ftree-parallelize-loops=4
-ftree-vectorize -o pr34330.s -fsched
I'm investigating an ICE on m68k architecture. I'm not quite sure what
is the right way to fix the bug so I welcome any feedback on the below
analysis.
Compilation fails on the assert in dwarf2out.c:based_loc_descr():
/* We only use "frame base" when we're sure we're talking about the
Amker.Cheng wrote:
Hi :
I'm puzzled when looking into speculative scheduling in gcc, the 4.2.4 version.
First, I noticed the document describing IBM haifa instruction
scheduler(as PowerPC Reference Compiler Optimization Project).
It presents that the instruction motion from bb s(dominated by t)
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
...
This code uses eliminate_regs(), which implicitly assumes reload_completed
as it uses reg_eliminate[], which assumes that frame_pointer_needed is
properly set, which happens in ira.c. However, in some cases
Richard Guenther wrote:
...
Yes, though we should probably try to catch the DECL_ABSTRACT case
further up the call chain - there shouldn't be any location lists for abstract
function. Thus, see why
static dw_die_ref
gen_formal_parameter_die (tree node, tree origin, dw_die_ref context_die)
...
Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Ye, Joey wrote:
...
Anyone can help me through this please?
It was supposed to have two latency definitions at most (one in
define_insn_reservation and another one in define_bypass). That time it
seemed enough for all processors supported by GCC. It also simplif
Ye, Joey wrote:
Maxim and Vladimir Wrote:
Anyone can help me through this please?
It was supposed to have two latency definitions at most (one in
define_insn_reservation and another one in define_bypass). That time it
seemed enough for all processors supported by GCC. It also simplified
daniel tian wrote:
Hi Dr. Uday Khedker:
Happy New Year!
I met hazard problem. And I have debuged this error for a few
days. I wrote DFA to avoid load hazard, but still it exists. I wonder
whether in default the command './cc1 hazard.c' doesn't compile the
file with DFA.
By default the s
Alex Turjan wrote:
Hi,
During scheduling Im confronted with the fact that an instruction is moved
from the ready list to queued with the cost 2, while according to my
expectations the insn should have been moved to queued with cost 1.
Did anybody experience similar problem?
From what you desc
DJ Delorie wrote:
I'm working on a VLIW coprocessor for MeP. One thing I noticed is
that sched2 won't bundle the function's RET with the insn that sets
the return value register, apparently because there's an intervening
USE of that register (insn 30 in the example below).
Is there any way arou
appreciate Intel sponsoring this project.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
ma...@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x724
On 5/20/10 4:04 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
CodeSourcery is working on improving performance for Intel's Core 2 and Core
i7 families of processors.
CodeSourcery plans to add support for unaligned vector instructions, to
provide fine-
On 5/21/10 9:06 PM, Vladimir N. Makarov wrote:
On 05/17/2010 02:44 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
...
If your favorite benchmark significantly under-performs on Core 2 or
Core i7 CPUs, don't hesitate asking us to take a look at it.
What I saw is people complaining about -mtune=core2 for polyh
On 7/9/10 3:22 PM, Anthony Green wrote:
Hi Maxim,
Recent changes to config.gcc are preventing me from building a
moxie-uclinux toolchain.
Anthony,
What is the error the build process is failing on?
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
ma...@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x724
ht surface, the only reason not to
enable cselib for single-block regions in sched-rgn may be increased
compile time. That requires some benchmarking, but my gut feeling is
that the benefits would outweigh the compile-time cost.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
ma...@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x724
On 7/22/10 3:34 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
Cselib can /always/ be used during second scheduling pass
Except with the selective scheduler when it works on regions that are
not extended basic blocks, I suppose?
Right, I was considering
On 8/13/10 11:40 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:44:57AM +0400, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
CodeSourcery is working on improving performance for Intel's Core 2 and
Core i7 families of processors.
CodeSourcery plans to add support for unaligned vector instructions, to
provide
On 10/19/10 6:16 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
...
I agree that ISSUE_POINTS can be removed, as it was not used (maybe
Maxim can comment more on this).
I too agree with removing ISSUE_POINTS, it never found any use.
Regards,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
ma...@codesourcery.com
(650) 331
atches/2010-10/msg01529.html
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
+1-650-331-3385 x724
to fix the problem may be to move Tom's
extension elimination pass /after/ loop optimizers. Do you (or anyone reading
this thread) have suggestions on what would be a good spot in the optimization
pipeline for sign- and zero-extension elimination pass?
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
+1-650-331-3385 x724
t-2.C, inline-devirt-3.C are also
fully optimized.
Let me know if you have suggestions for tackling the other cases.
Do you think committing the testcases mainline, XFAIL'ed as necessary, would be
useful?
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
+1-650-331-3385 x724
0005-Testc
Peter Steinmetz wrote:
Currently, within the ready_sort macro in haifa-sched.c, the call to qsort
is passed "rank_for_schedule" to help it decide which of two instructions
should be placed further towards the front of the ready list.
Rank_for_schedule uses a set of ordered heuristics (rank, prior
H. J. Lu wrote:
FYI, today's gcc 4.2 generates many unaligned access on IA64:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26721
It may be related to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01001.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg01000.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
Daniel Berlin wrote:
...
If i don't turn off scheduling entirely, this testcase now takes >10
minutes to compile (I gave up after that).
With scheduling turned off, it takes 315 seconds, checking enabled.
It looks like the scheduler is now trying to schedule some single region
with 51,000 ins
clock_var ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
+{
+ arm_reorder (ready, *pn_ready);
+ return 0;
+}
+
static int fp_consts_inited = 0;
/* Only zero is valid for VFP. Other values are also valid for FPA. */
2006-05-30 Maxim Kuvyrkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* haifa-sched.c (priority): Set INSN_PRIOR
Vladimir Makarov wrote:
...
I am agree with this. Two months ago Maxim submitted patches which
affects only ia64 except one thing affecting all targets - the patch
which builds more scheduling regions and as consequence permits more
aggressive interblock scheduling.
Insn scheduling before
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
...
Not even a single comment - shame on you both! :-) If this is the
solution we choose, can we make sure that there's at least a comment
explaining what's going on?
Totally agree. That was an *example patch*. Here is a bit updated, but
still an example of how we
Grigory Zagorodnev wrote:
Hi!
Build of mainline GCC on ia64-redhat-linux failed since Thu Jun 8
16:23:09 UTC 2006 (revision 114488). Last successfully built revision is
114468.
I wonder if somebody sees the same.
...
- Grigory
This was fixed in revision 114604.
--
Maxim
opportunity to ...
- Hack on the toolchain;
- Develop your engineering, managerial, and communication skills;
- Gain experience in product development;
- Get public recognition for your open-source work;
- Become open-source maintainter.
Contact:
- Maxim Kuvyrkov
- Email: ma
able.
Ard, you committed 5ae44f302b7d1d19f25c4c6f125e32dc369961d9 to Bionic that adds
handling of ARM COPY relocations. Can you comment on why COPY relocations from
executables to DT_SYMBOLIC libraries are forbidden?
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
KugelWorks
rojects (e.g., GCC, Binutils, GDB, glibc -- or just
blanket ALL) you wish to contribute to.
Usually the FSF copyright office replies within 1-2 days, and feel free to ping
us back here at gcc@ if FSF legal stalls.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
KugelWorks
developed
for ia64.
Regards,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
KugelWorks
On 27/06/2013, at 8:35 PM, Paulo Matos wrote:
> Let me add to my own post saying that it seems that the problem is that the
> list scheduler is greedy in the sense that it will take an instruction from
> the ready list no ma
e how your patch fixes
the problem. You write how and which architectures your patch was tested on.
5. You ping your submission every 2 weeks to one of the maintainers until they
review your patch.
Good luck!
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
KugelWorks
configured for a hard-float target, but eglibc is being compiled
for a soft-float target. [For hard-float targets there is no need for FP
helpers in libgcc since processor is assumed to handle that in silicon.]
Good luck,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
KugelWorks
; http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/showlog.php?id=10520&mode=view
Jan-Benedict,
Mn10300-linux does not appear to be supporting linux. Mn10300-linux target
specifier expands into mn10300-unknown-linux-gnu, where *-gnu implies using
Glibc library, which doesn't have mn10300
Thank you!
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.kugelworks.com
uses a performance problem for you. You can add better handling of this
situation by remembering whether last_pending_memory_flush is memory read or
memory write and then use it to select correct dependency type for insn 90:
output, anti or true.
Let me know whether you want to pursue this and I can help with advice and
patch review.
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.kugelworks.com
problem is coming from. Add -fdump-tree-all and -fdump-rtl-all to
the compilation flags and find which optimization pass makes the wrong
decision. Then you trace that optimization pass or file a bug report in hopes
that someone (optimization maintainer) will look at it.
Read through GCC wiki for information on debugging and troubleshooting GCC:
- http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GettingStarted
- http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FAQ
- http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.kugelworks.com
On 6/12/2013, at 4:25 am, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
>> Output dependency is the right type (write after write). Anti
>> dependency is write after read, and true dependency is read after write.
>>
>> Depende
On 6/12/2013, at 8:44 am, shmeel gutl wrote:
> On 05-Dec-13 02:39 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> Dependency type plays a role for estimating costs and latencies between
>> instructions (which affects performance), but using wrong or imprecise
>> dependency type does not aff
ily/c-cppbuiltin.c: In function ‘void
> c_cpp_builtins(cpp_reader*)’:
> /home/jbglaw/repos/gcc/gcc/c-family/c-cppbuiltin.c:1014:370: error:
> ‘ANDROID_TARGET_OS_CPP_BUILTINS’ was not declared in this scope
> make[1]: *** [c-family/c-cppbuiltin.o] Error 1
I'm looking into this.
Thanks,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.kugelworks.com
On 10/12/2013, at 7:28 am, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 08:21 +1300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
>> I'm looking into this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Maxim Kuvyrkov
>> www.kugelworks.com
>
>
> My mips-mti-linux-gnu bu
sched-ebb and sel-sched is not the best and one will likely get
weird artefacts by trying out non-default settings.
I believe that only IA64 backend supports selective scheduling reliably. I've
other ports trying out selective scheduling, but I don't know whether those
efforts got positive results.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.kugelworks.com
On 6/12/2013, at 9:44 pm, shmeel gutl wrote:
> On 06-Dec-13 01:34 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> On 6/12/2013, at 8:44 am, shmeel gutl wrote:
>>
>>> On 05-Dec-13 02:39 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>>>> Dependency type plays a role for estimating costs and latenci
On 11/12/2013, at 11:14 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> On 11/12/2013, at 5:17 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Paulo Matos wrote:
>>>> Hi,
&
On 11/12/2013, at 3:45 pm, Ramana Radhakrishnan
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>> On 11/12/2013, at 11:14 am, Ramana Radhakrishnan
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov
>>> wrote:
ys I will be bugging past GCC GSoC admins and mentors to
get an idea of what I'm getting myself into. Please send me a note if you
haven't been GSoC mentor in the past years, but want to try this year.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
eas/choices for
a week or so.
For GSoC 2014 timeline see
https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/events/google/gsoc2014 .
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
Thank you,
[1] irc://irc.oftc.net/#gcc
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
!). You will be able to update details of
the proposal later.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
he GSoC website and have a application filed
by end of Thursday (only 2 days left!).
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
or a GSoC GCC project? If you do want to apply, please
make sure you are registered at the GSoC website and have a application filed
by end of Thursday (only 2 days left!).
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
vice code
> optimizations?
Guray
Do you have a proposal for a GSoC GCC project? If you do want to apply, please
make sure you are registered at the GSoC website and have a application filed
by end of Thursday (only 2 days left!).
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
lly, please don't cross-post to several lists, gcc@gcc.gnu.org is the
correct list for development discussions (with gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org being
the list for discussion of specific patches).
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
wrong in my assumptions above, and you can commit to the GSoC project
being your first priority for the summer months, please apply with your
proposal on the GSoC website. There is very little time left, so move fast.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
rt for garbage collection
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
On Mar 15, 2014, at 6:50 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You are receiving this message because you are in top 50 contributors to GCC
> [1]. Congratulations!
>
> Since you are a top contributor to GCC
does not "accidentally" place something after those "special"
sequences thus creating a corrupted basic block.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
ge.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2014
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
