Steven Bosscher appointed RTL optimizers reviewer

2013-08-11 Thread Gerald Pfeifer 
It's my pleasure to announce the appointment of Steven Bosscher
as RTL optimizers reviewer.

Congratulations and Happy Hacking, Steven!

Gerald

PS: Please update MAINTAINERS accordingly.

gcc-4.9-20130811 is now available

2013-08-11 Thread gccadmin 
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20130811 is now available on
  ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20130811/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.

This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.9 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk revision 201654

You'll find:

 gcc-4.9-20130811.tar.bz2 Complete GCC

  MD5=4354a630d843aec32c0e0bab5f9f6a84
  SHA1=0db3e4d71486960bf4309d4badfca5db60859ae1

Diffs from 4.9-20130804 are available in the diffs/ subdirectory.

When a particular snapshot is ready for public consumption the LATEST-4.9
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: How to specify multiple OSDIRNAME suffixes for multilib (Multilib usage with MPX)?

2013-08-11 Thread Terry Guo 


> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of
> Ilya Enkovich
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 8:37 PM
> To: GCC Development
> Subject: How to specify multiple OSDIRNAME suffixes for multilib (Multilib
> usage with MPX)?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm currently trying to create multilib libraries compiled with MPX.
> The main difference with existing multilib variants on i386 target is
> that new targets (32/mpx, 64/mpx) are compatible with old variants
> (32, 64). Also we should not prevent user from using mpx if he does
> not have MPX variants for some libraries - legacy versions should be
> used instead. Thus we need to check several suffixes instead of one.
> E.g. for 64bit MPX binary we should firstly check ../lib64/mpx, then
> check ../lib64 and finally the default one.
> 
> I looked at MULTILIB_REUSE and thought it might solve my problem
> according to documentation: "And for some targets it is better to
> reuse an existing multilib than to fall back to default multilib when
> there is no corresponding multilib." [1]. So I tried following
> declarations:
> 
> MULTILIB_OSDIRNAMES+= m64/fmpx=../lib64/mpx
> MULTILIB_REUSE = m64=m64/fmpx
> 
> But it appeared that only the first entry for some options set counts
> when multilibs are parsed in gcc.c and my reuse here is just ignored.
> 
> Is it a wrong implementation of MULTILIB_REUSE or my wrong
> understanding of this option? Is there a way to implement mpx
> multilibs still allowing legacy ones when some mpx libs are missing?
> 
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Target-Fragment.html#Target-
> Fragment
> 
> Thanks,
> Ilya

Hi Ilya,

Sorry for the later response. I am the author of MULTILIB_REUSE. So far this
feature is not flexible enough to meet your requirement. It can't
dynamically decide to choose m64/fmpx if such libraries are there, then
secondly choose m64 if m64/fmpx don't exist. This feature only makes a
static decision. The following statement:
 MULTILIB_REUSE = m64=m64/fmpx
means that when options m64 and fmpx are given, we should reuse libraries
for m64 always. And for this purpose, we also need:
MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS = m64/fmpx to make sure libraries for "m64 fmpx" won't
be built.

If m64/fmpx isn't excluded, the MULTILIB_REUSE will think the required
libraries are there and no need to reuse.

IMHO, the way used by gcc to select multilib is based on string match rather
than detecting the existence of libraries. So the flexible way like you
wanted isn't supported yet. 

BR,
Terry

Re: load reverse

2013-08-11 Thread sravan megan 
Anyone please help me to get out of this issue

Thanks,
Sravan

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 5:29 PM, sravan megan  wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>I am new to GCC. I was working in an Embedded processor with
> GCC-4.6.4 version.
>
>I need to add load/store reverse instructions to the MD file.
>
>My instructions will look as below:
>
>LWX Rd,Ra,Rb
>
> operation: Addr := Ra + Rb
> Rd := *Addr(loading data with the opposite endianness)
>
>   SWX Rd,Ra,Rb
>
>  operation: Addr := Ra + Rb
> *Addr := Rd(storing data with the opposite endianness)
>
>
>
> To add the above instructions in to md file I tried below pattern in md 
> file
>
>  (define_insn "movsi_rev"
>   [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=d,m")
> (bswap: SI (match_operand:SI 1 "move_src_operand" "m,d")))]
>   ""
>   "@
>lwx\t%0,%1,%0
>swx\t%0,%1,%0"
>   [(set_attr "type" "load,store")
>   (set_attr "mode"  "SI")
>   (set_attr "length""4,4")])
>
>
>I wrote a small testcase which is generating swx instruction but
> the operands are more due to which it is failing in assembler phase
>
> ex:
> int store_rev(int *n)
> {
>   return *n) & 0xff00) >> 24)
> | (((*n) & 0x00ff) >>  8)
> | (((*n) & 0xff00) <<  8)
> | (((*n) & 0x00ff) << 24));
>
> }
>
> for the above store_rev function I need to generate only single swx 
> instruction.
> I was successful in generating the swx instruction but instead of 3
> registers compiler is generating one extra operand "0"  swx r0,r2,0,r0
>
>ex: instead of swx r0,r2,r0 it is generating swx r0,r2,0,r0
>
> can anyone please help me in removing the extra operand in the above
> instruction.
>
> Thanks,
> Sravan