Richard Biener writes:
> When investigating the code-bloat / slowness of wide-ints I noticed
> that when creating a wide_int_ref that operation (optionally, but
> in practice almost always) gets a precision input that is ultimately
> determined by get_*_result of the appropriate traits. I don't
>
Hello Jeff,
Please see my comments below:
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 4:14 PM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Aldy Hernandez (al...@redhat.com); r...@redhat.com; Jason M
Hi Umesh/Ian,
I followed the steps and it has generated the required branch instruction.
Thankyou so much for the links and steps.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> Here you go ,
>
> a)define new field in the struct "CUMULATIVE_ARGS" says as int long_call;
>
> b)set
When investigating the code-bloat / slowness of wide-ints I noticed
that when creating a wide_int_ref that operation (optionally, but
in practice almost always) gets a precision input that is ultimately
determined by get_*_result of the appropriate traits. I don't
see code dealing with precision
Yeah, this is my point exactly. Atom case seems just triggered that fact.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> On 16/10/13 10:37, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 15, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Igor Zamyatin wrote:
>>> Hi All!
>>>
>>> Is there any particular reason that matmul
Status
==
GCC 4.8.2 has been released, the branch is again open for regression
bugfixes and documentation fixes. GCC 4.8.3 could be tentatively released
in March next year.
Quality Data
Priority # Change from Last Report
--- ---
Here you go ,
a)define new field in the struct "CUMULATIVE_ARGS" says as int long_call;
b)set the field long_call to known vlaue@ init_cumulative_args() .
c)In the TARGET_FUNCTION_ARG hook
The last time this MACRO is called, it is called with
MODE == VOIDmode, and its result is
The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.8.2 has been released.
GCC 4.8.2 is the second bug-fix release containing important fixes for
regressions and serious bugs in GCC 4.8.1 with over 70 bugs fixed since
the previous release.
This release is available from the FTP servers listed at:
http://www
On 16/10/13 10:37, pins...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 15, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Igor Zamyatin wrote:
Hi All!
Is there any particular reason that matmul* modules from libgfortran
are compiled with -O2 -ftree-vectorize?
I see some regressions on Atom processor after r202980
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-c
> On Oct 15, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Igor Zamyatin wrote:
>
> Hi All!
>
> Is there any particular reason that matmul* modules from libgfortran
> are compiled with -O2 -ftree-vectorize?
>
> I see some regressions on Atom processor after r202980
> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-09/msg00846.html)
Thanks a lot for the explanation!
I can take care of the benchmarking but only on Intel hardware... Do
you think that possble changes according those results would be
acceptable?
Thanks,
Igor
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Igor Zamyat
Yes.. I still had no luck.
Do you have any thoughts on this??
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> You still stuck with this issue ???
>
> ~Umesh
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Nagaraju Mekala
>> wrote:
>>> H
You still stuck with this issue ???
~Umesh
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Nagaraju Mekala
> wrote:
>> Hi Ian,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/09/13 12:32, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>>
>> Dear Jeff and the rest of Steering committee members,
>> Thank you very much for approving the license terms of the Cilk
>> Library. I couldn't attach the zipped copy of the patch due to its si
14 matches
Mail list logo