Hi,
this patch fixes graphite PR68809, a 6 regression.
The problem we run into is that we return true in same_close_phi_node
for two single-argument phis, one with an int 0 argument, and one with a
char 0 argument:
...
_1 = PHI <(int)0>
_2 = PHI <(char)0>
...
The result types of the two p
Hi,
this patch fixes graphite PR68715, a 6 regression.
In scop_detection::merge_sese, we check if the exit bb of the merged
sese region is dominated by the entry bb:
...
if (...
|| !dominated_by_p (CDI_DOMINATORS, get_exit_bb (combined),
get_entry_bb (combined
Hi,
this patch fixes lto PR70187, a 6 regression.
We run into an ICE in in possible_polymorphic_call_targets when
accessing nodes[0]->decl because nodes == vNULL:
...
if (!outer_type->all_derivations_known)
{
if (!speculative && final_warning_records
&& TREE_CODE (TREE_TY
Ping...
Hi,
when the free-standing libstdc++-headers are installed, the C++ header
file does not always compile, because it includes and this
includes under certain conditions (__cplusplus >= 201103L &&
ATOMIC_INT_LOCK_FREE > 1) the header file
but that fails to compile because it needs which
On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch fixes graphite PR68809, a 6 regression.
>
> The problem we run into is that we return true in same_close_phi_node for two
> single-argument phis, one with an int 0 argument, and one with a char 0
> argument:
> ...
> _1 = PHI <(int)0
On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch fixes graphite PR68715, a 6 regression.
>
> In scop_detection::merge_sese, we check if the exit bb of the merged sese
> region is dominated by the entry bb:
> ...
> if (...
> || !dominated_by_p (CDI_DOMINATORS, get_exit_bb (co
Hi,
This is an obvious change to dump message in vect_analyze_loop_2. Apparently,
the wrong message is copies/pasted from another place, the code has nothing to
do with function calls or data references. We should report that loop cannot
be vectorized because of malformed loop nest.
Build succ
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/15/2016 07:13 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>>
>>> The problem here is that
>>>
>>>void* labels[] = {
>>> &&l0, &&l1, &&l2
>>>};
>>>
>>> gets gimplified to
>
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch fixes lto PR70187, a 6 regression.
>
> We run into an ICE in in possible_polymorphic_call_targets when accessing
> nodes[0]->decl because nodes == vNULL:
> ...
> if (!outer_type->all_derivations_known)
> {
> if (
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This is an obvious change to dump message in vect_analyze_loop_2.
> Apparently, the wrong message is copies/pasted from another place, the code
> has nothing to do with function calls or data references. We should report
> that loop c
On March 16, 2016 3:17:20 AM GMT+01:00, "H.J. Lu" wrote:
>> Where is the current definition of empty types you're proposing for
>use in
>> GCC? Is the behavior of this case clear from that definition?
>
>https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-03/msg00071.html
>
>Jason's patch follows it. Here is a tes
Hi,
When I tried to decrease # of IV candidates, I removed code that adds IV
candidates for use with constant offset stripped in use->base. This is kind of
too aggressive and triggers PR69042. So here is a patch adding back the
missing candidates. Honestly, this patch doesn't truly fix the is
Hi,
One issue revealed in tree ifcvt is the pass stores/tracks DRs against its
memory references in IR. This causes difficulty in identifying same memory
references appearing in different forms. Given below example:
void foo (int a[], int b[])
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> When I tried to decrease # of IV candidates, I removed code that adds IV
> candidates for use with constant offset stripped in use->base. This is kind
> of too aggressive and triggers PR69042. So here is a patch adding back the
> miss
> Maybe the time has come now for a proper inclusion of Ada/Gnat support in
> gcc-* for GNU/Hurd. (Yes, I commit to maintain Ada in gcc for GNU/Hurd in
> the foreseeable future, according to my abilities).
>
> Attached is an updated patch, now living e.g. in GNU/Debian versions of
> gcc-5 and gcc-
On 16/03/16 09:53, Richard Biener wrote:
Hmm, it looks like for all what this function does this effectively
pessimizes scop merging and it would be easier to split 'exit'
in case its destination is unsuitable (not trivially empty).
Agreed.
The
/* For now we just want to bail out when ex
On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 11:08 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >
> > Maybe the time has come now for a proper inclusion of Ada/Gnat support in
> > gcc-* for GNU/Hurd. (Yes, I commit to maintain Ada in gcc for GNU/Hurd in
> > the foreseeable future, according to my abilities).
> >
> > Attached is an up
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 03:18:43PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Like x32, aarch64 ILP32 needs to define FFI_SIZEOF_JAVA_RAW. This fixes
> the java interpreter.
Should this go through upstream libffi first? I can't remember the right
order for these.
Anyway, this is OK in whatever order is need
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 03:46:00PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> * include/private/gcconfig.h [AARCH64] (ALIGNMENT, CPP_WORDSZ):
> Define for __ILP32__.
OK.
Thanks,
James
> ---
> boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h | 9 +++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Sorry for not supplying a ChangeLog yet, I've been busy lately with other
> things. Since there is another new file s-osinte-gnu.adb in the latest
> patch, that might be added too.
AFAICS there is only s-osinte-gnu.ads in the posted patch.
--
Eric Botcazou
Hi,
Atm, using fdump-tree-all-graph produces invalid dot files:
...
$ rm *.c.* ; gcc test.c -O2 -S -fdump-tree-all-graph
$ for f in *.dot; do dot -Tpdf $f -o dot.pdf; done
Warning: test.c.006t.omplower.dot: syntax error in line 1 near '}'
Warning: test.c.007t.lower.dot: syntax error in line 1 nea
On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 11:53 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >
> > Sorry for not supplying a ChangeLog yet, I've been busy lately with other
> > things. Since there is another new file s-osinte-gnu.adb in the latest
> > patch, that might be added too.
> AFAICS there is only s-osinte-gnu.ads in the po
James Greenhalgh writes:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 03:18:43PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Like x32, aarch64 ILP32 needs to define FFI_SIZEOF_JAVA_RAW. This fixes
>> the java interpreter.
>
> Should this go through upstream libffi first? I can't remember the right
> order for these.
Dunno, t
23 matches
Mail list logo
