On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Wink Saville wrote:
> It looks like it will be awhile before its included, what's your guess
> on when stage1 will commence for GCC 7?
>
> About how often will you be rebasing hjl/interrupt/stage1 onto master?
I update hjl/interrupt/stage1 branch about once a wee
It looks like it will be awhile before its included, what's your guess
on when stage1 will commence for GCC 7?
About how often will you be rebasing hjl/interrupt/stage1 onto master?
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Wink Saville wrote:
> > What
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Wink Saville wrote:
> What is the status of the x86 interrupt attribute patch?
>
> One of the last references I see is here and an attempt to update the
> middle-end here.
>
> -- Wink
You can try hjl/interrupt/stage1 branch in git repo, which is queued for
GCC 7.
What is the status of the x86 interrupt attribute patch?
One of the last references I see is here and an attempt to update the
middle-end here.
-- Wink
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Kugan
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Another potential use of value ranges is the profile estimation.
> >> http://www.lighterra.com/papers/valuerangeprop/Patterson1995-ValueRangeProp.pdf
> >> It seems to me that we may want to have something that can feed sane loop
>
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 05:52:49PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> libbpp-qt_2.1.0-1ubuntu2
>
> [ ICE: Looks like: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68068
> but reproduces on current trunk. Testcase reducer is in progress. ]
This turned out to be https://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
On Sat, Jan 16 2016, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> After analyzing some test case failures in GCC and GDB I realized that
>> there are various problems with the handling of DWARF pieces
>> (particularly from registers) in the current implementations of GCC and
>> GDB. I'm working on a fix for the GDB
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
> > On 17 January 2016 at 14:56, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> I was having a look at PR69133.
> >> It appears that with -flto-partition=none,
> >> cgraph_node::get_untransformed_body ()
> >> is called twice for node
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Kugan
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Another potential use of value ranges is the profile estimation.
>> http://www.lighterra.com/papers/valuerangeprop/Patterson1995-ValueRangeProp.pdf
>> It seems to me that we may want to have something that can feed sane loop
>> bounds for p
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 17 January 2016 at 14:56, Prathamesh Kulkarni
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I was having a look at PR69133.
>> It appears that with -flto-partition=none,
>> cgraph_node::get_untransformed_body ()
>> is called twice for node with asm_name _ZTh
On 17 January 2016 at 14:56, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> Hi,
> I was having a look at PR69133.
> It appears that with -flto-partition=none,
> cgraph_node::get_untransformed_body ()
> is called twice for node with asm_name _ZThn4_N11xercesc_3_11C5m_fn6ERKi.
> c++filt says it is: non-virtual thunk
On 01/16/2016 01:56 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 05:13:29PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
On 01/13/2016 03:04 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 03:11:29PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
On 01/09/2016 12:53 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
I still don't understand why you c
12 matches
Mail list logo
