gcc-4.9-20140105 is now available
Snapshot gcc-4.9-20140105 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.9-20140105/ 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 206348 You'll find: gcc-4.9-20140105.tar.bz2 Complete GCC MD5=9a5b1a6c76affaf92b9096a26dda9b71 SHA1=cc4a375848dd2522580f0ba65139bababd0f566e Diffs from 4.9-20131229 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: Remove spam in GCC mailing list
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 08:40:07PM +0900, Tae Wong wrote: >You want to send a mail to python-dev at python dot org. > >The spam still exists in gcc-bugs mailing list: >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00689.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00759.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00776.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg01181.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg01586.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-09/msg01513.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-09/msg01946.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-09/msg01947.html >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-09/msg02011.html > >There's no reason that the gcc-bugs mailing list can post bug reports directly. > >Please delete spam messages from gcc-bugs. These messages are, AFAIK, pointless. I'm not aware of anyone working as a spam removal service. I am one of the admins for gcc.gnu.org and I sure as @#$* am not paid enough to do this. I do spend a lot of my time trying to make sure that spam doesn't get through and that's the limit of what I'm willing to do. I'd think that a lot of this thread (especially the launchpad part) is off-topic for this mailing list. cgf
thread_local broken in gcc 4.8 ?
According to http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/cxx0x_status.html
the keyword "thread_local" is supported in gcc 4.8 when using -std=c++11
However, thread_local seems broken. Let's say we compile a multi-file
program that uses thread_local:
g++ a.cpp -c -o a.o -std=c++11
g++ b.cpp -c -o b.o -std=c++11
g++ a.o b.o -o prog -std=c++11
We get the following error:
b.o: In function `TLS wrapper function for foo_instance':
b.cpp:(.text._ZTW12foo_instance[_ZTW12foo_instance]+0x5): undefined
reference to `TLS init function for foo_instance'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.8.2 20131212 (Red Hat 4.8.2-7)
file foo.hpp:
class foo {
public:
inline foo() {}
inline ~foo() {}
inline double bar() { return 123.456; }
};
file a.cpp:
#include "foo.hpp"
thread_local foo foo_instance;
file b.cpp:
#include "foo.hpp"
extern thread_local foo foo_instance;
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
double bar = foo_instance.bar();
return 0;
}
Finding a relevant place for a custom GCC pass
Hi guys, I want to write a pass which can find the calculations performed on the right hand side of each statement. In the below example - VAR1 = 1; VAR1++; VAR1 = VAR1 + 5; I want to be able to capture the equivalent statements i.e. VAR1 = 1; VAR1 = 2; VAR1 = 7; To achieve this, I dumped various intermediate files using "-fdump-tree-all'. I looked at all of them manually and found that either the statements are non-evaluated (during initial stages) or they are completely optimized, hence losing the intermediate assignment calculations (during later stages). There is no pass which generates dumps related to the intermediate assignment calculations. I am not able to understand where I should aim to place my pass in order to achieve the above mentioned functionality. Initially, I had thought of writing IPA pass but I looked at 'copyprop' and 'forwprop' dumps and saw that everything is optimized to the last statement. I am not able to understand how a pass should be placed between GIMPLE stage and later stages so that intermediate calculations such as the ones mentioned above in the example, can be captured. Please provide suggestions and help regarding this. Thanks a lot in advance ! Regards, Sandeep Chaudhary.
Re: Finding a relevant place for a custom GCC pass
On Sun, 5 Jan 2014, Sandeep K Chaudhary wrote: Hi guys, I want to write a pass which can find the calculations performed on the right hand side of each statement. In the below example - VAR1 = 1; VAR1++; VAR1 = VAR1 + 5; I want to be able to capture the equivalent statements i.e. VAR1 = 1; VAR1 = 2; VAR1 = 7; To achieve this, I dumped various intermediate files using "-fdump-tree-all'. I looked at all of them manually and found that either the statements are non-evaluated (during initial stages) or they are completely optimized, hence losing the intermediate assignment calculations (during later stages). There is no pass which generates dumps related to the intermediate assignment calculations. I am not able to understand where I should aim to place my pass in order to achieve the above mentioned functionality. Initially, I had thought of writing IPA pass but I looked at 'copyprop' and 'forwprop' dumps and saw that everything is optimized to the last statement. I am not able to understand how a pass should be placed between GIMPLE stage and later stages so that intermediate calculations such as the ones mentioned above in the example, can be captured. Please provide suggestions and help regarding this. Short answer: you can't. You can either have your passe before ccp, and duplicate the functionality of ccp, or you can hack the ccp pass to insert your code in it, but I doubt there is a suitable plugin hook for that, so you may have to edit gcc's source code directly. If you compile with -g and look at debug statements, the information is not completely lost after the pass that optimizes this to just VAR1 = 7, but it still wouldn't be convenient to use that for your purpose. -- Marc Glisse
Re: Finding a relevant place for a custom GCC pass
Thanks for the reply Marc ! If I place my pass before ccp then I guess I have to implement the means to perform calculations on my own so that it can duplicate the functionality of ccp, right? I will also look at the source code to see if I can modify the source code directly. Is pass_ccp in tree-ssa-ccp.c the correct one to look at? Please let me know. Yes, I have tried the second option you suggested. It's not convenient for my purpose. Thanks and regards, Sandeep. On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Marc Glisse wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jan 2014, Sandeep K Chaudhary wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> I want to write a pass which can find the calculations performed on >> the right hand side of each statement. In the below example - >> >>VAR1 = 1; >>VAR1++; >>VAR1 = VAR1 + 5; >> >> I want to be able to capture the equivalent statements i.e. >> >> VAR1 = 1; >> VAR1 = 2; >> VAR1 = 7; >> >> To achieve this, I dumped various intermediate files using >> "-fdump-tree-all'. I looked at all of them manually and found that >> either the statements are non-evaluated (during initial stages) or >> they are completely optimized, hence losing the intermediate >> assignment calculations (during later stages). There is no pass which >> generates dumps related to the intermediate assignment calculations. >> >> I am not able to understand where I should aim to place my pass in >> order to achieve the above mentioned functionality. Initially, I had >> thought of writing IPA pass but I looked at 'copyprop' and 'forwprop' >> dumps and saw that everything is optimized to the last statement. I am >> not able to understand how a pass should be placed between GIMPLE >> stage and later stages so that intermediate calculations such as the >> ones mentioned above in the example, can be captured. Please provide >> suggestions and help regarding this. > > > Short answer: you can't. > > You can either have your passe before ccp, and duplicate the functionality > of ccp, or you can hack the ccp pass to insert your code in it, but I doubt > there is a suitable plugin hook for that, so you may have to edit gcc's > source code directly. > > If you compile with -g and look at debug statements, the information is not > completely lost after the pass that optimizes this to just VAR1 = 7, but it > still wouldn't be convenient to use that for your purpose. > > -- > Marc Glisse -- Thanks and regards, Sandeep K Chaudhary.
