also in theory error out in GNU binutils as which can help.
Accepting a patch to both I suspect will be acceptable upstream
communities since there is little to no development on the MIPS
backends and they are only now used for embedded/legacy developement.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Cont
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 9:26 PM Sidney Marshall wrote:
>
> In the code:
> ---
> #include
> #include
> #include
>
> // commenting out this forward declaration causes the code to fail
> // under g++-14.2.0
> //
> // the forward d
wrong).
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
PS cross posting between these 3 lists is not a good idea and
gcc-bugs@ is for automated emails from bugzilla and not exactly looked
at.
>
> Best Regards,
> Geeta D
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 10:08 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>
>> On
actly a driver and links directly against the
front-ends so it does not need to call out to other programs*.
*) The exception is the linker so you will run into issues there if
you have a lot of files to link against.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Best Regards,
> Geeta D
l diagnostic issue.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> 1) place code below in main.cpp
>
> 2) g++ -std=c++20 main.cpp
>
> and you get
>
> main.cxx: In function 'my_co do_co()':
> main.cxx:16:7: error:
> 'my_co::promise_type::get_return_objec
On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 3:48 PM Ihor Solodrai wrote:
>
> Hi everyone.
>
> I built and ran selftests/bpf with GCC 15-20241229, and would like to
> share my findings.
>
> Building required small adjustments in the Makefile, besides -std=gnu17
>
> With the following change we can mitigate int64_t issu
23539 | typedef _Bool bool;
> | ^~~~
>
> Full log at [3], and also at [4].
These are simple, the selftests/bpf programs need to compile with
-std=gnu17 or -std=gnu11 since GCC has changed the default to C23
which defines false and bool as keywords now and can'
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 7:21 PM builder--- via Gcc-testresults
wrote:
>
> A new failure has been detected on builder gcc-fedora-arm64 while building
> gcc.
>
> Full details are available at:
> https://builder.sourceware.org/buildbot/#/builders/183/builds/8332
Aarch64 build fails now due to -
On Sat, Nov 9, 2024, 11:19 AM Sad Clouds via Gcc wrote:
> Hello, I don't know if this is a known GCC bug or intentional design,
> but code like this:
>
> double value = 0.0;
> ...
> if (value == 0.0)
> {
> ...
> }
>
> Results in the following warning with gcc-12.2.0:
>
> "... warning: com
On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 1:25 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2024 at 6:26 PM Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >
> > As an experiment Sourceware is now running an forgejo v9 instance at
> > https://forge.sourceware.org
> >
> > Everybody with an @sourcew
do it?
This was not mentioned so I thought I could register with my
@gcc.gnu.org account as the email and it would work.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> There is also a new mailinglist for discussion about the setup and the
> best way to create a pull-request workflow. Please subscribe
e gimple_convert just calls gimple_build (unless it is already the
correct type).
You can find which simplifications is done by adding the `-folding`
option to the dump option (note this option is not documented but that
is PR 114892).
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Before this code is run,
While working on the review from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/663418.html .
I noticed that there are places which use `side effects` and some use
`side-effects`. I assume we should follow a similar pattern as
`back-end` vs `back end`. That is `side effect` when used as a
oing
it so removing it is ok too.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 8:53 AM Jason Merrill via Gcc wrote:
>
> We moved to a bootstrap requirement of C++11 in GCC 11, 8 years after
> support was stable in GCC 4.8.
>
> It is now 8 years since C++14 was the default mode in GCC 6 (and 9 years
> since support was complete in GCC 5); perhaps it's
once
were and that is why clang didn't run into folks asking to fix it.
Early 2000s vs now have a different landscape when it comes to file
systems. This is why I said what is the a same file if you can't rely on
inodes working?
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Thanks,
> Jeremy
>
>
> On Se
nd
that is documented here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cppinternals/Guard-Macros.html) so does
it make sense to really standardize `#pramga once` here or just push
other implementations to add a similar optimization instead?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Cheers,
> Jeremy
>
> On Sep 6 2024, at 1
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 10:04 PM Jeremy Rifkin wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking at #pragma once behavior among the major C/C++ compilers as
> part of a proposal paper for standardizing #pragma once. (This is
> apparently a very controversial topic)
>
> To put my question up-front: Would GCC ever b
=116246) but he found
that there is already a bug report opened against gdb for it though:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30114 .
Also libiberty upstream is technically gcc git repo; though most
patches are posted to either the GCC mailing list or to gdb and the
GCC mailing or t
know it is an supported GNU extension
either so deprecating them for GCC 15 seems like a decent idea.
Any thoughts on this? And possibly removing support in GCC 16?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
() = 2384, from+1 = 2385, tag: LTO_null
> > >
> > > From lto_read_decls:
> > > unsigned from = data_in->reader_cache->nodes.length ();
> > > /* Read and uniquify SCCs as in the input stream. */
> > > enum LTO_tags tag =
gned"
+ }
set nshort [file tail [file dirname $test]]/[file tail $test]
list-module-names $test
```
should work but I am not 100% I got the TCL syntax correct.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Best regards
>
> Thomas
On Sat, Jul 27, 2024 at 3:37 PM pifminns deettnta via Gcc
wrote:
>
> using uint_least64_t = __UINT_LEAST64_TYPE__;
>
> uint_least64_t testbswap(uint_least64_t a) noexcept
> {
>return __builtin_bswap64(a);
> }
>
> clang:
> https://godbolt.org/z/z8GTsazf4
>
>
> _Z9testbswapm:
>revb.d $a
lobal flag rather
than an optimization flag.
common.opt does not mark -flto-partition= as an optimization flag either.
Plus IIRC flto-partition= needs to be passed down to the linker in
this case too.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> For instance, if I want to add -flto-partition=one to Ofast, he
On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 12:10 PM Dalbey, Keith via Gcc wrote:
>
> The means by which this FIX was implemented caused OTHER problems
>
> template
> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::pair& pr)
> {
> os << "(" << pr.first << ", " << pr.second << ")";
> return os;
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 2:14 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 10:58 AM Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
> >
> > Andrew Pinski writes:
> > > I need some help with the vector cost model for aarch64.
> > > I am adding V2HI and V4QI mode support
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 5:04 PM Dalbey, Keith via Gcc wrote:
>
> So I'm on redhat 7 and just got devtoolsset-12 and code (a system of
> overloaded<< operators) that was working with devtoolset-10 now break
> (because of ordering)
>
> To not bury the lead..
>
> My code relies on the version 11 or
I need some help with the vector cost model for aarch64.
I am adding V2HI and V4QI mode support by emulating it using the
native V4HI/V8QI instructions (similarly to mmx as SSE is done). The
problem is I am running into a cost model issue with
gcc.target/aarch64/pr98772.c (wminus is similar to
gcc.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 11:57 AM Jason Merrill via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 2:38 PM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> > > Am 27.06.2024 um 19:04 schrieb Jason Merrill via Gcc :
> > >
> > > https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2024/p2434r1.html
> > > proposes to require that
s not do anything)
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 3:19 AM Liviu Ionescu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> GCC 12.4 was released two days ago, but I could not yet find the release
> archive at https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/.
>
> Could you upload it?
It is located at https://gcc.gnu.org/ftp/gcc/releases/gcc-12.4.0/ .
Looks like it was no
ump_printf_loc in vect_pattern_recog_1.
`-fopt-info-all-internals` as documented
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-14.1.0/gcc/Developer-Options.html#index-fopt-info
Note you can find the same information in the vect dump file if you
dump if via -fdump-tree-vect-details too.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
>
>
> Thanks
> Sent using https://www.zoho.com/mail/
can do about this since
data layout is "hard" to do to get the best performance always.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
>
> Best regards.
>
>
> Clark Zhao
onth to write
I like proposal 2 better than proposal 1 since it allows for cleanups later on.
I think about starting this in July if folks think proposal 2 is the way
forward.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
cification (or the compiler
> silently ignored them because they were not applicable to my machine -
> ugh), the cause of the problem lies elsewhere.
AARCH64 armv8-a has FMA as part of its base ISA.
So you want to try with `-ffp-contract=off` instead.
RDMA turns on/off instructions which
4 includes an FMA instruction but since the base ISA
does not include it, it is not enabled by default.
I am suspect the aarch64 "excessive exceeding the threshold for
errors" are all caused by the more use of FMA rather than anything
else.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> diff lapack-amd
with it.
Especially when it comes cores that don't have not been upstream
directly from the company that produces them.
The default scheduling model is cortex-a53 anyways. And you didn't use
-mtune= nor -mcpu=; only -march=native which just changes the arch
features and not the tuning or sc
n a recent OS works?
Basically glibc's check for GCC version is only designed for released
versions of GCC. So bisecting GCC means sometimes that check will
break.
I have not fully looked into it but maybe glibc folks can provide a
workaround to disable the version check to assume a much older version
of GCC here.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Cheers,
> Stefan
While looking into PR 114666, I noticed that we don't verify COND_EXPR's first
operand. In most of my recent patches to match.pd, I was assuming that it would
be a boolean (or a type which would contain
[0,1]) but this PR shows we could end up with an 1-bit signed integer in there.
We could fix m
might fall under this and MIPS n32). Or do you split a 64bit argument
into the lower and upper half registers. Maybe you should warn/error
out if not passed the correct sized argument.
Also do you sign or zero extend a 32bit argument for LP64 targets?
Right now it is not obvious nor documented in
ult to adding `--as-needed` to the
command line (except around libgcc). Some distros add patches which
add `--as-needed` by default though. It looks like alpine is one of
those distros. Maybe you should ask them instead of asking us. It
looks like they made the change between their 3.4 and 3.5 relea
is the wrong email list, it should be sent to gcc-help@.
Second, your subject line can be read as being offensive to some folks
due to the use of the phrase "lives matter".
Third, this is what the C++ standard says it should be. And it might
be better to be brought up to a C++ forum rather than one about the
GCC implementation of the C++ standard.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Thanks.
> OE
On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 1:20 PM Eric Gallager wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 3:16 PM Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > -fgnu-tm support has not been improved since GCC 5 or earlier. It is
> > not even supported with LTO. Does it make sense to deprecate the
&g
On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 8:26 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Andrew Pinski via Gcc:
>
> > -fgnu-tm support has not been improved since GCC 5 or earlier. It is
> > not even supported with LTO. Does it make sense to deprecate the
> > support for GCC 14 and remove it in GC
-fgnu-tm support has not been improved since GCC 5 or earlier. It is
not even supported with LTO. Does it make sense to deprecate the
support for GCC 14 and remove it in GCC 15?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 1:08 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 6:19 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > I feel like I have asked this before. Currently, GCC uses calls to
> > __tls_get_addr to obtain the address of global-dynamic
On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 6:19 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>
> I feel like I have asked this before. Currently, GCC uses calls to
> __tls_get_addr to obtain the address of global-dynamic TLS variables.
> On other architectures with support for GNU2 TLS descriptors, those are
> used by default.
nds32 support in Linux was removed last year:
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Andes-Tech-NDS32-Removal
The support for glibc never made it upstream as far as I can tell either.
What are others thoughts on this?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
like the evolution of that work even.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Kind regards
> Jonny
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 8:42 AM Dmitry Antipov wrote:
>
> (The following sample is taken from my LKML post at
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/11/15/213)
>
> $ cat t-build-bug.c
>
> struct vring_tx_mac {
> unsigned int d[3];
> unsigned int ucode_cmd;
> } __attribute__((packed));
>
> s
On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 8:33 PM Maxim Blinov via Gcc wrote:
>
> I see, thanks for clarifying, that makes sense.
>
> In that case, what about doing the inverse? I mean, are there unique
> patches in the vendor branch, and would it be useful to try to
> upstream them into master? My motivation is to
On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 8:39 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
>
> Emacs has a very useful facility. You press “C-x 4 a” in a place where
> you make changes, and the editor automatically opens the right ChangeLog
> file and adds a draft entry to it, like this:
>
> 2023-11-06 Florian Weimer
>
>
On Sat, Nov 4, 2023 at 9:41 AM Enrico via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
> for a custom architecture I am working on, I would like to entirely disable
> the usage of hardware floating point instructions in favor of library
> methods on demand.
>
> I need advice on what is the best strategy to do this.
On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 3:56 AM Daniil Frolov wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> When investigating bit shifts I got an incomprehensible moment with
> the following example:
>
> int f(int x, int k)
> {
> int tmp = x >> k;
> return (tmp & 1) << 10;
> }
>
> If we would like to take a look into GIMPLE then
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 2:12 PM David Malcolm wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-10-27 at 12:48 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > Hi David and others,
> > I am in the process of improving phi-opt and moving what was
> > handled
> > in value_replacement to match-and-simplify a
thing else like move analyzer earlier before phiopt?
Attached is the patch which shows the 2 testsuite failures. I have not
done a full bootstrap with it; just a build and run the testsuite.
Thanks,
Andrew
From 02324ac702fb5e39ccfdbd4910b5240762679593 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andrew Pinski
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 11:01 AM Simon Sobisch via Gcc wrote:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html has a bunch of tools
> under "Tools/packages necessary for modifying GCC", but GNU Bison is
> missing.
>
> I found it interesting to see that some files like under intl say
> 1 /* A
Looks like it was removed on accident here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blobdiff;f=gcc/doc/install.texi;h=3bf2305c8d14181bfb61d112ab3e1c0c2f605322;hp=5735f054317e08b2c5b629adfe72a308459b8bd9;hb=e8645a4001a8d117dd336ea75942aac49101af49;hpb=3825be8c96775cf8e6fcb5eef04455f07717a5ea
But it is
> produce more efficient code.
>
> Or there if is a better way to get rid of MASK_STORE, please tell me
> about that. :)
So there are 2 issues with this transformation which you need to take
into account.
1) C11/C++11 threading model (-fallow-store-data-races is needed)
2) foo could be read only and cause a trap if written to. if the
branch is never taken there would be no writes
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Thanks
> Hanke Zhang
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:28 PM Richard Biener via Fortran
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:48 PM Jeff Law via Fortran
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/27/23 12:21, Toon Moene wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The lto-ing of libgfortran did succeed, because I did get a new warning:
> > >
> > > gfortran -
hooks which seems exactly what you need in this case
TARGET_NEED_IPA_FN_TARGET_INFO
TARGET_UPDATE_IPA_FN_TARGET_INFO
And then use that information in can_inline_p target hook to mask off
the ISA bits:
unsigned int info = ipa_fn_summaries->get (callee_node)->target_info;
if ((info & RS6000_FN_TARGET_INFO_HTM) == 0)
{
callee_isa &= ~OPTION_MASK_HTM;
explicit_isa &= ~OPTION_MASK_HTM;
}
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 12:33 AM Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 10:38 AM Martin Uecker via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > (moved to gcc@)
> >
> > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 08:18:28AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:35 PM Ken Matsui wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:23 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:09 PM Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have merged all my patches into a sing
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:09 PM Ken Matsui via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have merged all my patches into a single branch for better
> maintainability for me, but I am unable to build GCC. Initially, I
> faced an error related to RID_MAX, which was fixed in
> https://github.com/ken-matsui/gcc-gsoc23
ski/src/upstream-gcc-git/gcc/gcc/gimple-range.cc:138
0xd1a334 expand_expr_real_2(separate_ops*, rtx_def*, machine_mode,
expand_modifier, gimple*)
/home/apinski/src/upstream-gcc-git/gcc/gcc/expr.cc:9969
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
diff --git a/gcc/cfgexpand.cc b/gcc/cfgexpand.cc
index edf292cfbe9..
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 12:26 AM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2023, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I was reading some code in tree-vect-patterns.cc and I came across
> > vect_recog_mixed_size_cond_pattern . The code tries to handle
> > compariso
Hi,
I was reading some code in tree-vect-patterns.cc and I came across
vect_recog_mixed_size_cond_pattern . The code tries to handle
comparisons from COND_EXPR but that cannot happen any more (after
r13-707-g68e0063397ba82).
Should this code be removed now?
Thanks,
Andrew
On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 8:52 AM Şahin Duran via Gcc wrote:
>
> Dear GCC Developers,
>
> I think I've just discovered a bug/ undefined situation in the compiler.
> When I try to call a weakly defined function, compiler successfully
> generates the code of calling procedure. However, this calling pro
On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 7:41 PM Hongtao Liu via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 9:38 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 9:35 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 2:08 AM Toon Moene wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wonder if I am the only one to see this:
> > > >
//gcc.gnu.org/wiki/HowToPrepareATestcase should help on how to
write the testcases.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> gcc/c-family/c.opt | 8
> gcc/c/c-typeck.cc | 9 ++---
> gcc/c/gimple-parser.cc | 9 ++---
> gcc/cp/coroutines.cc | 11 +++
&g
On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 7:11 PM chuanqi.xcq via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We're discussing to implement `-fno-coroutines` in clang so that we can
> disable the coroutine feature with C++ standard higher than 20.
> A full discussion can be found here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156247. A
> major motiv
On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 7:50 PM Jiang, Haochen via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> As you all know that we are continuously working on new ISA implementation
> for i386 backend.
>
> There is one thing that I am really curious about when I read the code.
>
> In gcc/config/i386/i386-cpuinfo.h, we have s
On Sun, Jul 9, 2023 at 11:24 PM jacob navia wrote:
>
> Hi
> The assembler checks at each instruction if the instruction is within the
> selected subset of risc-v extensions or not. I do not quite understand why
> this check is done here.
>
> I suppose that gcc, before emitting any instruction do
ute
:
```
It does not make sense for a noreturn function to have a return type
other than void.
```
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> best regards.
> Julian
>
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 9:07 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 5:54 PM Julian Waters via Gcc
at the relevant
> code is
You could just add
__builtin_unreachable(); (or std::unreachable(); if you are C++23 or
unreachable() if you are using C23).
Or even add while(true) ;
I am pretty sure not having an option is on purpose and not really
interested in adding an option here because of the above workarounds.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> best regards,
> Julian
On Sun, Jul 2, 2023 at 5:48 PM Aaron Lorey via Gcc wrote:
>
> Am Mo., 26. Juni 2023 um 20:09 Uhr schrieb David Malcolm
> :
> >
> > On Mon, 2023-06-26 at 18:59 +0200, Aaron Lorey via Gcc wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > this is the first time I am writing to a mailing list. I've tried
> > > researc
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 12:10 PM Krister Walfridsson via Gcc
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2023, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> > IIRC we have some simplification rules that turn bit operations into
> > arithmetics. Arithmetic is allowed if it keeps the values inside
> > [-1,0] for signed bools or [0, 1]
On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 8:04 AM Michael Matz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2023, Julian Waters via Gcc wrote:
>
> > On the contrary, code compiled with gcc with or without the applied patch
> > operates very differently, with only gcc with the applied patch producing a
> > fully correctly o
; "\t" "push rbp" "\n"
> "\t" "mov rbp, rsp"
> "\t" "push r15" "\n"
> "\t" "mov r15, rcx" "\n");
>
> [] [[gnu::noinline, gnu::used]] ()
ote:
>>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> That can't be right, on my system a test of asm vs asm volatile with -O3 and
>> -flto=auto yields very different results, with only the latter being
>> correct. The patch fixed it and caused gcc to emit correct assembly
>>
>&
t correct assembly
Can you provide a few testcases? Because the gimplifier should always happen.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> best regards,
> Julian
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 12:08 AM Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 9:03 AM Julian Waters via Gcc
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 9:03 AM Julian Waters via Gcc wrote:
>
> gcc's documentatation mentions that all basic asm blocks are always volatile,
> yet the parser fails to account for this by only ever setting
> volatile_p to true
> if the volatile qualifier is found. This patch fixes this by adding
front-end specific trees there is a front-end specific function
which does the mapping for those too.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> kind regards
because it was set before 2003. There could not be an ABI break.
r0-50273-gded9bf77e35ce9a2246 fixed GCC for the AIX ABI though.
>
> ~Umesh
>
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 8:28 PM Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 7:50 AM Umesh Kalappa via Libc-alpha
> &g
Plus the 32bit ABI document does not document Complex argument passing
as it was written in 1995 and never updated.
https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/reference-manual/E500ABIUG.pdf does not
document it either.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Page 53:
>
> Map complex floating-point and complex int
On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 3:54 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> "Andrew Pinski" wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 2:25 PM Stefan Kanthak
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Just to show how SLOPPY, INCONSEQUENTIAL and INCOMPETENT GCC's developers
>
On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 2:25 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> Just to show how SLOPPY, INCONSEQUENTIAL and INCOMPETENT GCC's developers are:
>
> --- dontcare.c ---
> int ispowerof2(unsigned __int128 argument) {
> return __builtin_popcountll(argument) + __builtin_popcountll(argument >>
> 64) == 1;
On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 2:38 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> "Jakub Jelinek" wrote, completely clueless:
>
> > On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 11:04:11PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> >> OUCH: popcnt writes the WHOLE result register, there is ABSOLUTELY
> >> no need to clear it beforehand nor to clea
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:56 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> compile the following function on a system with Core2 processor
> (released January 2008) for the 32-bit execution environment:
>
> --- demo.c ---
> int ispowerof2(unsigned long long argument)
> {
> return (argument & argument
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 7:47 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
> ppc64le-linux systems.
> Moreover, I run bootstrap on x86_64-linux and checked ABI difference with
> abidiff.
This broke hwasan on aarch64. See https://gcc.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 8:32 AM Jerry D via Fortran wrote:
>
> Hello all and gcc overseers,
>
> I received a notice that the MasterMost server providers decided to drop
> their free service. Unfortunate and understandable.
>
> I plan to contact the Open Software Lab folks at Oregon State Universit
ded in newly built libgcc.
Since you didn't show the link line it is hard to tell what is going wrong.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> C:\msys64\ucrt64\x86_64-w64-mingw32\bin\ld.exe:
> ../src/c++11/.libs/libc++11convenience.a(thread.o):
> in function `__gthread_join':
> D:/Ecl
same as a > b ? a : b which would not cause
a trap.
If we think they should not trap, then I will create a patch and test
it for GCC 14.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 12:01 PM Paul Smith wrote:
>
> OK here's something super-strange I discovered:
>
> Enabling -faddress=sanitize in GCC, causes the glob(3) function to
> misbehave.
>
> I'm using GCC 11.3 / glibc 2.35 (x86_64 native). I have this simple
> program:
Maybe https://gcc.gnu.org/
On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 10:46 AM oszibarack korte via Gcc
wrote:
>
> *An unsolved problem for more than a decade!*
> *Dear GNU Compiler Collection development team!*
>
> *There is a problem with the gcc and g++ compilers for Linux operating
> systems!*
> *Here are 3 pieces of C and 3 pieces of C++
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 2:30 PM Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
>
> On 2/15/23 14:50, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> > Hi,
> >While fixing PR 108354, I came across that
> > ssa_name_has_boolean_range calls get_range_query with cfun as the
> > argument but sometimes whil
tions of negation (c.f. fold_negate_expr_1). */
(simplify
```
Note I can only so far reproduce the call to
ssa_name_has_boolean_range that causes an issue while building Ada
tools (while bootstrapping) because the code that needs to hit this is
related to variable sized type accesses.
Thanks
dardizing a new POSIX makefile syntax rather
than changing C++ here.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> [P1689R5]: https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P1689R5.html
>
> I've also added patches to include imported module CMI files and the
> module mapper file as dependencies of the compilation
On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 4:42 PM Stefan Kanthak wrote:
>
> "Thomas Koenig" wrote:
>
> > On 09.01.23 12:35, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> >> 20 superfluous instructions of the total 102 instructions!
> >
> > The proper place for bug reports is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ .
>
> OUCH: there's NO proper pl
C community does not provide prebuilt gcc binaries for a few
different reasons.
But distros do provide more recent prebuilt binaries, you could ask
them to build using PGO (some do already I think).
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
>
> Any feedback is appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Alexander Zaitsev
1 - 100 of 1479 matches
Mail list logo
