On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Karsten Ahnert
wrote:
>
> I am new to this list. If this is not the correct place for posting the
> question I apologize for any inconvenience.
This question should have gone to gcc-h...@gcc.gnu.org. Please take
any followups to gcc-help. Thanks.
> The following
Hi,
I am new to this list. If this is not the correct place for posting the
question I apologize for any inconvenience.
The following code produces strange results on a 32 bit Linux system
with gcc 4.6.1 (compilation with -m32):
double val = 52.30582;
double d = 3600.0 * 1000.0 * val;
long l = l
Olivier Hainque wrote:
> I had made a proposal to help the rs6000_mode_dependent_address
> issue, http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-04/msg01668.html.
>
> Seems to me that the general idea is still valid:
>
> << a number of places in the compiler use the
>mode_dependent_address_p predica
On Aug 1, 2012, at 13:18 , Alan Modra wrote:
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-04/msg01668.html.
> I like the idea.
:-)
> It is worth pursuing for code improvement we'll see
> even if we avoid the "o" constraint everywhere. For example,
> long long llo (long long *x) { return x
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 10:26:50AM +0200, Olivier Hainque wrote:
> I had made a proposal to help the rs6000_mode_dependent_address
> issue, http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-04/msg01668.html.
>
> Seems to me that the general idea is still valid:
>
> << a number of places in the compiler use
On Jul 17, 2012, at 17:34 , Alan Modra wrote:
> The ICE is
>
> combine.c:5318:1: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
> (insn 4211 1484 1493 140 (set (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 19 19 [2736])
>(const_int 32760 [0x7ff8])) [3 __gcov0.subst+816 S8 A64])
>(reg:DI 6 6
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Konstantin Vladimirov
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Working on private backend. Need to add some knobs to tune inlining.
> Code (with name of backend substituted to "my"):
>
> in my.c file:
>
> #undef TARGET_OPTION_DEFAULT_PARAMS
> #define TARGET_OPTION_DEFAULT_PARAMS my_option_
