Re: Second GCC 11.1 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

2021-04-23 Thread William Seurer via Gcc
On 4/23/21 8:31 AM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote: Some blocker bugs were reported against the first release candidate of GCC 11.1, so there is a second release candidate for GCC 11.1 available from https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.1.0-RC-20210423/ ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots

Re: "musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

2021-04-23 Thread Josh Haberman via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 4:34 PM Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 2:45 PM Josh Haberman via Gcc wrote: > > > > I wrote more about some motivation for guaranteed tail calls here: > > https://blog.reverberate.org/2021/04/21/musttail-efficient-interpreters.html > > So I was looking in

Re: "musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

2021-04-23 Thread Andrew Pinski via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 2:45 PM Josh Haberman via Gcc wrote: > > Would it be feasible to implement a "musttail" statement attribute in > GCC to get a guarantee that tail call optimization will be performed? > > Such an attribute has just landed in the trunk of Clang > (https://reviews.llvm.org/D99

gcc-9-20210423 is now available

2021-04-23 Thread GCC Administrator via Gcc
Snapshot gcc-9-20210423 is now available on https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20210423/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 9 git branch with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch

Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2021-04-23)

2021-04-23 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:55 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Status > == > > GCC 8.5 release and closing of the 8 branch is several months overdue, > we don't have enough time to maintain trunk and 4 supported release branches. > Therefore, I'd like to do 8.5-rc1 on 7th of May and release 8.5 and

Re: "musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

2021-04-23 Thread Josh Haberman via Gcc
David Malcolm via Gcc wrote: > FWIW I implemented something like this in GCC's middle-end here: > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=9a385c2d3d74ffed78f2ed9ad47b844d2f294105 > exposing it in API form for libgccjit: > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=15c671a79ca66df5

Re: "musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

2021-04-23 Thread Iain Sandoe via Gcc
David Malcolm via Gcc wrote: On Fri, 2021-04-23 at 12:44 -0700, Josh Haberman via Gcc wrote: Would it be feasible to implement a "musttail" statement attribute in GCC to get a guarantee that tail call optimization will be performed? Such an attribute has just landed in the trunk of Clang (htt

Re: "musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

2021-04-23 Thread David Malcolm via Gcc
On Fri, 2021-04-23 at 12:44 -0700, Josh Haberman via Gcc wrote: > Would it be feasible to implement a "musttail" statement attribute in > GCC to get a guarantee that tail call optimization will be performed? > > Such an attribute has just landed in the trunk of Clang > (https://reviews.llvm.org/D9

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Xinliang David Li via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:28 PM Jan Hubicka wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:27 AM Xinliang David Li > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:16 AM Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > > >> > > > >> > It uses create_llvm_prof tool which is in the same git repo. The > data > > >>

Re: origin/trunk branch - who added it?

2021-04-23 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 5:13 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > Few weeks ago, I noticed we have a new remote branch that follows > origin/master: > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/trunk > > Do we know who added it? And what was the motivation? I did; I've always preferred tha

"musttail" statement attribute for GCC?

2021-04-23 Thread Josh Haberman via Gcc
Would it be feasible to implement a "musttail" statement attribute in GCC to get a guarantee that tail call optimization will be performed? Such an attribute has just landed in the trunk of Clang (https://reviews.llvm.org/D99517). It makes it possible to write algorithms that use arbitrarily long

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:27 AM Xinliang David Li > wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:16 AM Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > >> > > >> > It uses create_llvm_prof tool which is in the same git repo. The data > >> > parsing part is shared with create_gcov, but the writer is obviously > >>

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Xinliang David Li via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:27 AM Xinliang David Li wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:16 AM Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> > >> > It uses create_llvm_prof tool which is in the same git repo. The data >> > parsing part is shared with create_gcov, but the writer is obviously >> > different for the t

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Xinliang David Li via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:16 AM Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > It uses create_llvm_prof tool which is in the same git repo. The data > > parsing part is shared with create_gcov, but the writer is obviously > > different for the two tools. > > OK and what are the main differences between llvmand gcc

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Jan Hubicka
> Hi. > > The current situation is that AutoFDO doesn't work with pretty simple > test-cases > we have in testsuite: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71672 > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81379 > > These are ~5 years old and nothing has happened. > > I'm pretty s

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Jan Hubicka
> > It uses create_llvm_prof tool which is in the same git repo. The data > parsing part is shared with create_gcov, but the writer is obviously > different for the two tools. OK and what are the main differences between llvmand gcc format? Honza > > David > > > > Honza > > > > > > David > >

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Xinliang David Li via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 9:54 AM Jan Hubicka wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:18 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > > > > On 4/23/21 9:00 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Hi, the create_gcov tool was

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Jan Hubicka
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:18 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > > On 4/23/21 9:00 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that > > it > > >> was only

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Xinliang David Li via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:18 AM Martin Liška wrote: > On 4/23/21 9:00 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that > it > >> was only used with Google G

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Xinliang David Li via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:00 AM Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc > wrote: > > > > Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that it > > was only used with Google GCC branch, but it is actually used with GCC > > trunk as we

Second GCC 11.1 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

2021-04-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc
Some blocker bugs were reported against the first release candidate of GCC 11.1, so there is a second release candidate for GCC 11.1 available from https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.1.0-RC-20210423/ ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11.1.0-RC-20210423 and shortly its mirrors. It has

GCC 8.5 Status Report (2021-04-23)

2021-04-23 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc
Status == GCC 8.5 release and closing of the 8 branch is several months overdue, we don't have enough time to maintain trunk and 4 supported release branches. Therefore, I'd like to do 8.5-rc1 on 7th of May and release 8.5 and close the branch a week after that. We have one P1 bug though - P98

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 9:18 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > On 4/23/21 9:00 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that it > >> was only used with Google GCC

origin/trunk branch - who added it?

2021-04-23 Thread Martin Liška
Hello. Few weeks ago, I noticed we have a new remote branch that follows origin/master: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/trunk Do we know who added it? And what was the motivation? Thanks, Martin

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Martin Liška
On 4/23/21 9:00 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc > wrote: >> >> Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that it >> was only used with Google GCC branch, but it is actually used with GCC >> trunk as well. >> >> G

Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC

2021-04-23 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc
On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:28 AM Xinliang David Li via Gcc wrote: > > Hi, the create_gcov tool was probably removed with the assumption that it > was only used with Google GCC branch, but it is actually used with GCC > trunk as well. > > Given that, the tool will be restored in the github repo. It