On 06/03/14 21:03, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
On 03/06/2014 03:14 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
Still, would you accept a patch to mark this flag as an optimization?
I think we should.
Submitted to gcc-patches for approval.
--
PMatos
Snapshot gcc-4.8-20140306 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.8-20140306/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.8 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Hi Doug!
Your recent VMS change committed by Arnaud Charlet won't build, see
eg. build log [1] for build #154768 [2], which is targeted to
alpha64-dec-vms:
g++ -c -DIN_GCC_FRONTEND -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE
-fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -W -Wall -Wno
On 06/03/14 21:03, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
On 03/06/2014 03:14 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
I have just run a few long benchmarks and even though I had high
expectations for improving performance the flag in our port causes a
~3% degradation in performance. Haven't had time to investigate why.
On 03/06/2014 03:14 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> On 06/03/14 15:15, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>> On 03/06/2014 08:55 AM, Paulo Matos wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Upon noticing ira-hoist-pressure in `gcc --help=optimizers` and not
>>> ira-loop-pressure,
>>> I am wondering why the latter is not marked as an O
On 06/03/14 15:15, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
On 03/06/2014 08:55 AM, Paulo Matos wrote:
Hi,
Upon noticing ira-hoist-pressure in `gcc --help=optimizers` and not
ira-loop-pressure,
I am wondering why the latter is not marked as an Optimization in common.opt:
fira-loop-pressure
Common Report Var(f
On 3/6/2014 1:01 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Thu, 6 Mar 2014, Ian Bolton wrote:
Hi there,
I see in common.opt that fp-contract=fast is the default for GCC.
But then it gets disabled in c-family/c-opts.c if you are using ISO C
(e.g. with -std=c99).
But surely if you have also specified -fu
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
>>> wrote:
Hi, I am an undergraduate student at Universit
On Thu, 6 Mar 2014, Ian Bolton wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I see in common.opt that fp-contract=fast is the default for GCC.
>
> But then it gets disabled in c-family/c-opts.c if you are using ISO C
> (e.g. with -std=c99).
>
> But surely if you have also specified -funsafe-math-optimizations then
>
Hi there,
I see in common.opt that fp-contract=fast is the default for GCC.
But then it gets disabled in c-family/c-opts.c if you are using ISO C
(e.g. with -std=c99).
But surely if you have also specified -funsafe-math-optimizations then
it should flip it back onto fast?
I see in gcc/opts.c th
On 03/06/2014 08:55 AM, Paulo Matos wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Upon noticing ira-hoist-pressure in `gcc --help=optimizers` and not
> ira-loop-pressure,
> I am wondering why the latter is not marked as an Optimization in common.opt:
>
> fira-loop-pressure
> Common Report Var(flag_ira_loop_pressure)
> Use IRA
Hi,
Upon noticing ira-hoist-pressure in `gcc --help=optimizers` and not
ira-loop-pressure,
I am wondering why the latter is not marked as an Optimization in common.opt:
fira-loop-pressure
Common Report Var(flag_ira_loop_pressure)
Use IRA based register pressure calculation
in RTL loop optimizati
Hi,
I have found a crash when compiling,and have narrowed the bug scope
in the csa pass.But I am not quite familar with that.Please help.
Cause:
if (hasRelativeWidth || hasRelativeHeight)
true false
/ \
/
On 02/17/2014 06:50 PM, Roman Gareev wrote:
Hi Tobias,
thanks for the answer!
I think that the segfault is being caused by NULL arguments being passedto
compute_deps
by loop_level_carries_dependences.*This is **causing **an* *assignment of**
NULL values to the following parameters of
On 03/02/2014 08:06 PM, Roman Gareev wrote:
Yes, this would be a 'solution'. However, I am in fact surprised that
those variables are NULL at all. Do you have an idea why this is the
case? Understanding this would help to understand if the patch you
propose is actually the right solution or if
On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi, I am an undergraduate student at University of Pune, India, and would
>> like to work on moving folding patterns from fold-const.c to gimple.
>
> I've seen the entry on our
Hi David,
I am very much thankful to you as your answer worked wonders for me.
The problem with the plugin is solved now. Thanks again.
On 3/5/14, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-03-05 at 21:58 +0530, Mohsin Khan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am developing plugins for the GCC-4.8.2. I am a newbie
17 matches
Mail list logo
