Imported GNU Classpath 0.90
Hi, GNU Classpath 0.90 was released last week. It contains a lot of new standard library classes and bug fixes. See http://savannah.gnu.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=4339 And the list of fixed bugs: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?product=classpath&target_milestone=0.90 This version has been imported now into the libjava directory on the trunk. Please let us know ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) if there are any issues with the new import. It has been tested on x86, x86-64 and ppc-32 on GNU/Linux and sun-sparc-solaris8 multilib and darwin-pcc 32-bit. But more testing is helpful (it also includes an update to the fdlibm library). Thanks, Mark -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Porting gcj to i386-darwin
Sandro Tolaini writes: > > On 10/mar/2006, at 20:42, Tom Tromey wrote: > > > libffi and mudflap were covered by Paolo and Andrew. > > I have done some work on sysv.S and now libffi compiles fine on OSX/ > Intel. Unfortunately, I had to put some #ifdef __APPLE__ this file > because Apple ships an old cctools with as that doesn't understand > some directives. My patch works on the 4.0 branch, I tried it on the > 4.2 branch but libffi has changed in such a way that compiling it > with the Apple as is not easily feasible (and I don't chew enough > assembly code to change it). You need to build everything from the same branch: gcc, libffi, everything. Don't use some other compiler. > > For libjava some porting may be required, though it shouldn't be very > > much. > > libjava compiled out-of-the-box after tweaking the configure scripts. > For boehm, I copied the one in the 4.2 branch and applied a patch > that Hans should have already put in the current CVS version. > > > For best results you will want to make sure that the code to turn > > signals into exceptions works properly. This is both OS- and > > architecture dependent. I haven't looked at the x86 darwin port, > > perhaps some gcc hacking is required. > > How can I try this? Is there some test case I can use? To begin with, don't worry about it. You can have a fully-working port without handling these traps, because we have default fallback code for memory accesses and divides. Andrew.
Re: GCC 4.0.3 Released
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > GCC 4.0.3 has been released. > > You need to add a link on the page > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0 > > Similarly for the 4.1.0 release on the page > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1 > > And don't you need to display the release date instead of "current changes" > for 4.1.0 on the main page? The main page also needs updating for 3.4 status (3.4.6 released, branch closed) and mainline status (stage 2 from 18 Jan to 18 Mar, not stage 1). -- Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CodeSourcery mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)
Re: GCC 4.0.3 Released
> > GCC 4.0.3 has been released. > > You need to add a link on the page > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0 Also, the link from the home page in the NEWS/ANNOUNCEMENTS section is broken. It mistakenly links to .../gcc-4.0.3, (there is no such page). That link should be http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0 instead. --Kaveh -- Kaveh R. Ghazi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GCC 4.0.3 Released
"Joseph S. Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | The main page also needs updating for 3.4 status (3.4.6 released, branch | closed) that is part of the release I'm making. -- Gaby
gcc-4.2-20060311 is now available
Snapshot gcc-4.2-20060311 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.2-20060311/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.2 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision 111965 You'll find: gcc-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 Complete GCC (includes all of below) gcc-core-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 C front end and core compiler gcc-ada-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 Ada front end and runtime gcc-fortran-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 Fortran front end and runtime gcc-g++-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 C++ front end and runtime gcc-java-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 Java front end and runtime gcc-objc-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2 Objective-C front end and runtime gcc-testsuite-4.2-20060311.tar.bz2The GCC testsuite Diffs from 4.2-20060304 are available in the diffs/ subdirectory. When a particular snapshot is ready for public consumption the LATEST-4.2 link is updated and a message is sent to the gcc list. Please do not use a snapshot before it has been announced that way.
Re: gcc-4.2-20060304 is now available
Andrew Pinski wrote: >>> gcc-core-4.2-20060304.tar.bz2 = 15703096 >>> gcc-g++-4.2-20060304.tar.bz2 = 3905138 >>> gcc-objc-4.2-20060304.tar.bz2 = 191280 >>> gcc-fortran-4.2-20060304.tar.bz2 = 793478 >>> gcc-testsuite-4.2-20060304.tar.bz2 = 3606941 >>> >>> I'd really suggest to make this part of gcc-objc instead of adding >>> another one. >> >> Definitely. > > Wouldn't that make you dowload gcc-core, gcc-g++ and gcc-objc to just > to compile an objective-C compiler as objcp depends on c++ also? Yes, but so what? :-) Creating these separate modules seems somewhat pointless given the core is 80% of the total. Why not simplify things a bit and just package it all up together? -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery [EMAIL PROTECTED] (650) 331-3385 x713
Re: GCC 4.0.3 Released
Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote: > > > GCC 4.0.3 has been released. > > > > You need to add a link on the page > > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0 > > Also, the link from the home page in the NEWS/ANNOUNCEMENTS section is > broken. > > It mistakenly links to .../gcc-4.0.3, (there is no such page). That > link should be http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0 instead. Fixed with the obvious patch. Thanks! -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery [EMAIL PROTECTED] (650) 331-3385 x713
Re: Using only regular register names in emitted assembly
On Mar 10, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote: how is it possible to emit regular register names (e.g. for the MIPS to use $31 and not $ra) when producing assembly output (with mips-elf-gcc -S)? I want to just use the arithmetic names ($0 to $31). Yes, just edit gcc/config/mips/* and put in any names you care to, if it doesn't already support the names you want. [ note, you sent your email to the list that is relevant if you want to edit gcc, not use gcc, for using gcc, you'd want gcc-help ]
Re: autogen -T ../../trunk/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../trunk/fixincludes/inclhack.def
On Mar 10, 2006, at 7:15 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: On Mar 10, 2006, at 10:13 PM, Toon Moene wrote: autogen -T ../../trunk/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../trunk/ fixincludes/inclhack.def make[2]: autogen: Command not found Maybe we should change this to be autogen || true so that we don't get that many complaints about this. Anyways the recommeneded way to run the testsuite is "make -k check". This is not really an error but a warning that autogen was not found and fixincludes checking is almost never really need to be worried about either. Hum, I'd say that contrib/gcc_update should be used, if it wasn't, and that the make files should only have the dependencies if in maintainer mode, and that maintainers should have autogen. Toon would have to give us a hint which part failed him, for me to know just what went wrong.
Re: autogen -T ../../trunk/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../trunk/fixincludes/inclhack.def
Mike Stump wrote: Hum, I'd say that contrib/gcc_update should be used, if it wasn't, and that the make files should only have the dependencies if in maintainer mode, and that maintainers should have autogen. Toon would have to give us a hint which part failed him, for me to know just what went wrong. OK, I confess, I didn't use gcc_update. Will check next time (if I recall). -- Toon Moene - e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone: +31 346 214290 Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands A maintainer of GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/ My next laptop will have a crank
Re: GCC 4.0.3 Released
Eric Botcazou wrote: >> GCC 4.0.3 has been released. > > You need to add a link on the page > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0 > > Similarly for the 4.1.0 release on the page > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1 > > And don't you need to display the release date instead of "current changes" > for 4.1.0 on the main page? Now corrected, thanks. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery [EMAIL PROTECTED] (650) 331-3385 x713
re: gcc-4.0.3 released
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/changes.html#4.0.3 is missing a link to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=RESOLVED&resolution=FIXED&target_milestone=4.0.3 with text This is the list of problem reports (PRs) from GCC's bug tracking system that are known to be fixed in the 4.0.3 release. ... This was done for the previous two releases, and it's a nice touch. Can someone make the change? Thanks, Dan -- Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
Re: gcc-4.2-20060304 is now available
On Mar 11, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Mark Mitchell wrote: Creating these separate modules seems somewhat pointless given the core is 80% of the total. Why not simplify things a bit and just package it all up together? Just to put another idea on the table, we can require they grab the full tar file for Objective-C++ if we want. I don't care enough in any case to argue for or against any particular choice.
Re: Porting gcj to i386-darwin
On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:10 PM, Sandro Tolaini wrote: I have done some work on sysv.S and now libffi compiles fine on OSX/ Intel. Unfortunately, I had to put some #ifdef __APPLE__ this file because Apple ships an old cctools with as that doesn't understand some directives. My patch works on the 4.0 branch, I tried it on the 4.2 branch but libffi has changed in such a way that compiling it with the Apple as is not easily feasible (and I don't chew enough assembly code to change it). You can ask specific questions about particular things that you want to do for sysv.S and we can try and answer them. You'll want to switch over to the top of the tree, if you want to contribute anything to gcc. You can send us your 4.0 patches, and maybe someone might be willing to help up-port them. Considering all of the above facts, how can I submit a patch, and how much likely it is to be accepted? If you submit against 4.0 for 4.0, you have zero chance. If you submit against trunk, and it improves the port and it otherwise meets our standards, fairly likely. Do up your paper work now, if you haven't done that yet. Start small, try a small portion of the port that you think is easy to understand and not too dependent on other pieces and submit it.
100x perfomance regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X
During "bashmark" memory benchmark perfomance analyze, I found 100x perfomance
regression between gcc 3.4.5 and gcc 4.X.
-- test_cmd.cpp (simplified bashmark memory RW test) ---
#include
#include
template
static void int_membench(uint8_t* mb1, uint8_t* mb2)
{
for(uint32_t i = 0; i < Loops; i+=1)
{
#define T memcpy(mb1, mb2, Block_Size); memset(mb2, i, Block_Size);
T T T T T
T T T T T
#undef T
}
}
template
static void membench()
{
static uint8_t mb1[Buf_Size];
static uint8_t mb2[Buf_Size];
for(uint32_t i = 0; i < 1; i+=1)
int_membench(mb1, mb2);
}
int main()
{
membench<128, 4000>();
return 0;
}
---
GCC 3.4.5: 0.43user 0.00system 0:00.44elapsed
GCC 4.0.2: 34.83user 0.68system 0:36.09elapsed
GCC 4.1.0: 33.86user 0.58system 0:34.96elapsed
Compiler options:
-march=athlon-xp
-O3
-fomit-frame-pointer
-mfpmath=sse -msse
-ftracer -fweb
-maccumulate-outgoing-args
-ffast-math
I've played with various settings (-O2, -O1, without march, without tracer and
web, etc) without any serious difference. I.e. GCC4 is always many times slower
than GCC 3.4.5.
Lurking inside assembler generation showed that GCC4 don't inline memcpy and
memset calls.
-- test.c (uber simplified problem demonstration) -
#include
char* f(char* b)
{
static char a[64];
memcpy(a, b, 64);
memset(a, 0, 64);
return a;
}
GCC4 will generate calls to memcpy and memset in this example. GCC3 will inline
all calls.
So, it looks like GCC4 inliner is broken at some point.
Re: autogen -T ../../trunk/fixincludes/check.tpl ../../trunk/fixincludes/inclhack.def
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 11:30:45AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > Hum, I'd say that contrib/gcc_update should be used, if it wasn't, > and that the make files should only have the dependencies if in > maintainer mode, and that maintainers should have autogen. Toon > would have to give us a hint which part failed him, for me to know > just what went wrong. It's not a generated file. Autogen is run during the fixincludes testsuite. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery
