On 19-May-14 09:39 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 11:13 PM, shmeel gutl
wrote:
Are there hooks in gcc to deal with negative latencies? In other words, an
architecture that permits an instruction to use a result from an instruction
that will be issued later.
Do you mean bypass
518.log
Do you get exactly the same comparison failures using clang and GCC 4.2
as the stage1 compiler? That would rule out the system compiler
miscompiling stage1.
> In file included from .././../gcc-4.10-20140518/gcc/xcoffout.c:29:
> .././../gcc-4.10-20140518/gcc/tree.h:4576:3: warning: extrane
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 11:13 PM, shmeel gutl
wrote:
> Are there hooks in gcc to deal with negative latencies? In other words, an
> architecture that permits an instruction to use a result from an instruction
> that will be issued later.
Do you mean bypasses? If so there is a bypass feature whic
Are there hooks in gcc to deal with negative latencies? In other words,
an architecture that permits an instruction to use a result from an
instruction that will be issued later.
At first glance it seems that it will will break a few things.
1) The definition of dependencies cannot come from th
ald/20140518230801-31619-208275/gcc410-4.10.0.s20140518.log
In file included from .././../gcc-4.10-20140518/gcc/xcoffout.c:29:
.././../gcc-4.10-20140518/gcc/tree.h:4576:3: warning: extraneous template
parameter list in template specialization
template <>
^~~
.././../gcc-4.10-20140518
Snapshot gcc-4.10-20140518 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.10-20140518/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.10 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-05-18 at 12:33 -0300, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>I am needing a truly exceptions-clean (or exceptions-free) binary due to
>> some embedding systems platform.
>> -fno-exceptions is not enough of course.
>
>
> Did
On Sun, 2014-05-18 at 12:33 -0300, Daniel Gutson wrote:
> Hi,
>
>I am needing a truly exceptions-clean (or exceptions-free) binary due to
> some embedding systems platform.
> -fno-exceptions is not enough of course.
Did you think of making some extension (using MELT, see
http://gcc-melt.org/
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>> Comments?
>
> Sounds like a coding standard not a compiler multilib target.
>
> If you don't want exceptions don't use them.
If the STL is compiled with exceptions support, I can't get rid
off its overhead. It's not just about not using
Hi,
I am needing a truly exceptions-clean (or exceptions-free) binary due to
some embedding systems platform.
-fno-exceptions is not enough of course.
I am thinking about taking the concept to the backend through multilibs:
add some general -mno-exceptions or alike so there can be a selectable
10 matches
Mail list logo
