Re: Suffix for __float128 FP constants

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:08:15PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:10:43AM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > > BTW: IA64 has the same issues with two FP types (long double XFmode and > > > "longer double" TFmode). How is this solved for IA64? >

Re: $Revision$ in version string?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 05:24:12PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > Is there a way to add automatically updated SVN revision number to gcc > version string? Something similar to $Revision$ in RCS? > > I think it would be quite informative if during development phase "gcc > --version" would

Re: GCC Status Report (2007-06-15)

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 04:46:10PM +1000, Ben Elliston wrote: > On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 06:17 -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > BTW, an x86 DFP configure bug was reported 3 months ago. But it still > > hasn't benen fixed. I opened a DFP bug report: > > > > http://g

Re: FAIL: gcc.target/i386/sse2-vec-5.c on gcc-4.2 branch

On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:14:55AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello H.J.! > > The testscase gcc.target/i386/sse2-vec-5.c you ported from mainline > fails on gcc-4.2 branch because __builtin_ia32_vec_ext_v16qi builtin > does not exist in gcc-4.2. This builtin corresponds to pextrb insn > that was

libjava is broken

This patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2007-q2/msg00322.html breaks libjava build: /net/gnu-13/export/gnu/src/gcc/gcc/libjava/gnu/classpath/jdwp/natVMVirtualMachine.cc:700: error: prototype for 'gnu::classpath::jdwp::util::MethodResult* gnu::classpath::jdwp::VMVirtualMachine::executeMetho

Re: Object attribute tagging

On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 01:50:27AM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > The question was raised a while back on the gcc-patches and gdb-patches > lists of how GCC should tag objects with some ABI information for the use > of GDB, noting that various different methods have been in use >

Re: Suffix for __float128 FP constants

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:33:07PM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > We need a standard for __float128. Otherwise, a program using > > __float128 may generate different results with different > > compilers on different platforms. > > > > BTW, I had a __float128 patch for glibc. Because there is no >

Re: Suffix for __float128 FP constants

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:10:43AM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > BTW: IA64 has the same issues with two FP types (long double XFmode and > > "longer double" TFmode). How is this solved for IA64? > > > > Uros. > > This is different on IA64 HP-UX and IA64 Linux. On HP-UX, 128 bits is > the stand

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.17 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.17 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0615 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree. You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been

Re: Suffix for __float128 FP constants

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 07:25:06PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > H. J. Lu wrote: > > >>>I was trying to load a full 128 bit constant into __float128 variable, > >>>but > >>>with "L" suffix, I was able to load only XFmode constant. Is there a

Re: Suffix for __float128 FP constants

On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 09:06:36PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > > I was trying to load a full 128 bit constant into __float128 variable, but > > with "L" suffix, I was able to load only XFmode constant. Is there a special > > suffix for __float128 ava

Re: GCC Status Report (2007-06-15)

On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 04:31:14PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > H. J. Lu wrote: > > > Who are those relevant maintainers? Since Intel BID patches only > > affects DFP intrinsics, which is only supported on Linux/PPC, > > Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64 while Linux/PPC uses D

Re: Some thoughts about steerring commitee work

On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 06:54:46PM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > > There are quite a few known simple cases which vectorizer fails to > > vectorize. > > by "known" you mean there are open missed-optimization PRs for them? (if > Yes, that is what I meant. H.J.

Re: PR other/32351 [Was: Re: GCC Status Report (2007-06-15)]

On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 05:22:25PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > >BTW, an x86 DFP configure bug was reported 3 months ago. But it still > >hasn't benen fixed. I opened a DFP bug report: > > > >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32351 > > > >with a patch. I hope it will be fixed

Re: Some thoughts about steerring commitee work

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:33:52PM -0400, Vladimir N. Makarov wrote: > H. J. Lu wrote: > > >On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:21:53PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > > > > >>This is hardly a new thought, but I believe that for the i386 gcc is > >>handicap

Re: Some thoughts about steerring commitee work

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 07:17:22PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 6/15/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Why don't we turn on vectorizer at -O3 or even -O2, depending on > >ISA? I added -ftree-vectorize to BOOT_CFLAGS on x86-64. According to > >

Re: GCC Status Report (2007-06-15)

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 03:39:49PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > in the relatively near future. I am also considering the Intel BID > patches for 4.3, as those have arrived just under the wire. I would > appreciate comments from relevant maintainers about those patches. > Who are those relevant

Re: Some thoughts about steerring commitee work

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:21:53PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > This is hardly a new thought, but I believe that for the i386 gcc is > handicapped by reload. No matter how smart we are before reload, it > just take one poor decision by reload in an inner loop and we've lost > all the gains.

Re: How to submit Intel BID library patch?

On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 10:13:49AM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote: > On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 06:30 -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > With Intel BID library, we got 2 failures in unmodified DFP tests, > > fe-convert-1.c and fe-convert-2.c, due to different exceptions > > in Intel BID

How to submit Intel BID library patch?

We are ready to submit a patch for Intel BID library. We have 3 small patches and a 2.4MB bz2 tar file for Intel BID library itself. I can 1. Send a 2.4MB bz2 tar file to gcc-patches. 2. Create a bid branch in svn. 3. Put it on kernel.org. Which one is preferred? With Intel BID library, we got 2

Re: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-06-07)

On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 06:07:14AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:33:26PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > > I am aware of three remaining projects which are or might be appropriate > > for Stage 1: > > > > In the interests of moving forwards, I t

Re: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-06-07)

On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:33:26PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > I am aware of three remaining projects which are or might be appropriate > for Stage 1: > > In the interests of moving forwards, I therefore plan to close this > exceptionally long Stage 1 as of next Friday, June 15th. The projects

Re: When was decimal floating point added to gcc?

On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:40:14AM +1000, Ben Elliston wrote: > On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 16:46 +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > > In that case it's probably not that good of a idea to promote it (unless > > the maintainers are in favor, of course ;-). > > I'm happy to leave things as they are for no

Re: When was decimal floating point added to gcc?

On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 01:23:16PM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote: > On Sun, Jun 03, 2007 at 02:41:57PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > On Sun, 3 Jun 2007, Ben Elliston wrote: > > >> Are they mentioned in any gcc changes.html? > > > No, they're not. They probably should be. > > > > Do you think we c

Libjava is broken again

This patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-06/msg00151.html breaks libjava. One problem is it modifies libjava/classpath/m4/acinclude.m4 without ChangeLog entry. I believe this one - if test "x${GCJ}" = x && test "x${JIKES}" = x && test "x${user_specified_javac}" != xkjc && test "x${u

Re: When was decimal floating point added to gcc?

On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 08:17:40PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote: > On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 07:35 -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > When was decimal floating point added to gcc? I couldn't find it > > in any gcc changes.html. Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere? > > I think the

When was decimal floating point added to gcc?

When was decimal floating point added to gcc? I couldn't find it in any gcc changes.html. Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere? H.J.

Re: Predictive commoning miscompiles 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006

On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 10:30:52PM +0200, Zdenek Dvorak wrote: > Hello, > > > > Because the patch had other effects like adding a DCE after Copyprop > > > in the loop optimizer section. > > > > > > > Disable DCE after Copyprop in the loop optimizer section fixes my > > problem. Any idea why? >

Re: Predictive commoning miscompiles 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006

On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 09:55:53AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > Because the patch had other effects like adding a DCE after Copyprop > in the loop optimizer section. > Disable DCE after Copyprop in the loop optimizer section fixes my problem. Any idea why? Thanks. H.J.

Re: Predictive commoning miscompiles 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006

On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 09:37:54AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > The predictive commoning patch: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-05/msg01061.html > > miscompiles 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006 with -O2 -ffast-math on > Linux/x86-64. Zdenek, do you have any ideas? >

Predictive commoning miscompiles 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006

The predictive commoning patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-05/msg01061.html miscompiles 482.sphinx3 in SPEC CPU 2006 with -O2 -ffast-math on Linux/x86-64. Zdenek, do you have any ideas? BTW, we are working on a small testcase. H.J.

Re: Failure during bootstrap for libjava on powerpc linux

On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 06:52:30PM +0100, Rafael Espindola wrote: > On 5/27/07, Razya Ladelsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Getting failure during bootstrap for libjava on powerpc linux: > > > >configure: error: `CXX' has changed since the previous run: > >configure: former value: /h

Re: Dynamically linking against GMP and MPFR

On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 07:10:23AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > I just noticed a problem with our use of GMP and MPFR. If you > carefully install the appropriate versions of GMP and MPFR on one > machine in the normal way, and build gcc on that machine, > cc1/cc1plus/etc. wind up dynamically l

The best testsuite result on Linux/x86-64 in months

The testsuite result, including both 32bit and 64bit, of gcc 4.3 revision 124987 on Linux/x86-64: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-05/msg01148.html is the best in months. Thanks to everyone who makes it happen. H.J.

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.16 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.16 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0511 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree. You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been

How to generate x86 seto/sets instructions?

SSE4.2 string intrinsics need to generate seto/sets for OF==1 and SF==1, which aren't the standard arithmetic comparison and aren't support by gcc. I was wondering what was the best way to support them. My current plan is to add a new CC_MODE, CCX86, and reuse UNGT for OF == 1, UNLT for SF == 1 to

Gomp in mainline is broken

FYI, gomp in mainline is broken: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31722 Possible cause may be: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg01965.html H.J.

Re: Problem with patch for PR tree-optimization/29789

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 06:08:47PM -0700, Fu, Chao-Ying wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > > H. J. Lu > > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:02 PM > > To: Steve Ellcey > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECT

Re: Problem with patch for PR tree-optimization/29789

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:55:14PM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: > Richard, > > Has anyone reported any problems with your tree-ssa-loop-im.c patch that > fixes PR tree-optimization/29789? I have been looking at a failure with > the SPECfp2000 173.applu test. I found that if I compile it with > ver

Re: Does vectorizer support extension?

On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 08:55:24PM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 24/04/2007 01:03:25: > ... > > > > There are > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] vect]$ cat pmovzxbw.c > > typedef unsigned char vec_t; > &

Re: New option: -fstatic-libgfortran

On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 10:55:56AM +0200, François-Xavier Coudert wrote: > >Sorry about the (possibly off) question: would this apply also to > >GMP/MPFR, if not, wouldn't it make sense? > > GMP and MPFR are host libraries, so it is actually an independent > issue. However, it might be worth havin

Re: Does vectorizer support extension?

On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 12:15:05AM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > point is clear though which sse4 insns can be modeled using existing idioms > that the vectorizer can use? (I think it is cause I think you already > included it in your patch?) Yes, but not optimized. > > > > > > > We currently do

Re: GCC mini-summit - benchmarks

On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:49:04AM -0700, Steve Ellcey wrote: > Jim Wilson wrote: > > > Kenneth Hoste wrote: > > > I'm not sure what 'tests' mean here... Are test cases being extracted > > > from the SPEC CPU2006 sources? Or are you refering to the validity tests > > > of the SPEC framework itself

Re: Does vectorizer support extension?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:05:05PM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 23/04/2007 01:34:39: > > > On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 12:55:26AM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > > > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 23/04

Re: Does vectorizer support extension?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 12:55:26AM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 23/04/2007 00:29:16: > > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:14:20PM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > > > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Does vectorizer support extension?

On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 11:14:20PM +0300, Dorit Nuzman wrote: > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 20/04/2007 18:02:09: > > > Hi Dorit, > > > > SSE4 has vector zero/sign-extensions like: > > > > (define_insn "sse4_1_zero_extendv2siv

Re: GCC mini-summit - compiling for a particular architecture

On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 02:19:28AM +0200, Zdenek Dvorak wrote: > Hello, > > > Steve Ellcey wrote: > > > > >This seems unfortunate. I was hoping I might be able to turn on loop > > >unrolling for IA64 at -O2 to improve performance. I have only started > > >looking into this idea but it seems to

Does vectorizer support extension?

Hi Dorit, SSE4 has vector zero/sign-extensions like: (define_insn "sse4_1_zero_extendv2siv2di2" [(set (match_operand:V2DI 0 "register_operand" "=x") (zero_extend:V2DI (vec_select:V2SI (match_operand:V4SI 1 "nonimmediate_operand" "xm") (parallel [(c

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.15 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.15 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0418 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree. You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been

Re: A question on gimplifier

On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 12:23:24PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 4/14/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >__builtin_ia32_vec_set_v2di is > > > >v2di __builtin_ia32_vec_set_v2di (v2di, long long, const int) > > v2di and m128i are the sa

Re: A question on gimplifier

On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 02:49:47PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 11:28:59AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > __builtin_ia32_vec_set_v2di will be expanded to > > > > [(set (match_operand:V2DI 0 "register_operand" &q

A question on gimplifier

I am working on SSE4.1 intrinsic. For code: typedef long long __m128i __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16), __may_alias__)); typedef long long __v2di __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16))); extern __m128i res[2]; void foo(long long x, __m128i val) { res[0] = ((__m128i) __builtin_ia32_vec_set_v2

Re: RFC: Add target_isa_flags

On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 02:13:34PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 4/13/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:04:04PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > >> On 4/13/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> You don&

Re: RFC: Add target_isa_flags

On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:04:04PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 4/13/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You don't need to do all this, You can just use variable with MASK > which was added by JSM when PPC64-linux-gnu's target bits overflowed. For i386, w

Re: RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 05:25:45PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 03:09:55PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > BTW, I noticed that there are 2 bits > > > > NO_PUSH_ARGS > > SVR3_SHLIB > > > > defined in i386 backend. But they aren&#

Re: RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:48:43PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:35:10PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > i386.c has many > > > > static const struct builtin_description bdesc_comi[] = > > { > > { MASK_SSE, CODE_FOR_sse_comi, >

Re: RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 07:03:34PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > Are there any documents/examples for a second variable for flag bits? > > config/linux.opt uses Mask and InverseMask with Var. i386.c has many static const struct b

Re: RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 06:58:29PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > > You can specify Var together with Mask in .opt files; that allows you to > > > create a second variable for flag bits as a smaller patch for now. > > >

Re: RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:40:31PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: > > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Does anyone have suggestions to resolve this? Why not use structure > > of bitfields instead of int for target_flags? > > Years ago I added an optio

Re: RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 06:41:06PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > I am working SSE4.1/4.2 support. I need to add -msse4.1, -msse4.2 > > and -msse4. But i386 is running out target mask bits. I got > > > > ./options.h

RFA: i386 is running out target mask bits

I am working SSE4.1/4.2 support. I need to add -msse4.1, -msse4.2 and -msse4. But i386 is running out target mask bits. I got ./options.h:368:2: error: #error too many target masks Does anyone have suggestions to resolve this? Why not use structure of bitfields instead of int for target_flags?

Re: x86 inc/dec on core2

On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 11:13:17AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 10:51:22AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > > On Apr 8, 2007, at 8:51 PM, Zuxy Meng wrote: > > >Intel's optimization reference manual says that: > > > > I wasn't going off the doc

Re: x86 inc/dec on core2

On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 10:51:22AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > On Apr 8, 2007, at 8:51 PM, Zuxy Meng wrote: > >Intel's optimization reference manual says that: > > I wasn't going off the documentation... I'd be more interested in > either benchmarks or in recommendations by Intel people that kno

Re: x86 inc/dec on core2

On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 11:37:43AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > H. J. Lu wrote: > > >>>inc/dec has the same performance as add/sub on Core 2 Duo. But > >>>inc/dec is shorter. > >>> > >>> > >>What about partial flag register

Re: x86 inc/dec on core2

On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 11:29:46AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > >> I was wondering, if: > >> > >> /* X86_TUNE_USE_INCDEC */ > >> ~(m_PENT4 | m_NOCONA | m_CORE2 | m_GENERIC), > >> > >> is correct. Should it be: > >> > >> /* X86_TUNE_USE_INCDEC */ > >> ~(m_PENT4 | m_NOCONA | m_

Re: x86 inc/dec on core2

On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 01:27:09PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: > I was wondering, if: > > /* X86_TUNE_USE_INCDEC */ > ~(m_PENT4 | m_NOCONA | m_CORE2 | m_GENERIC), > > is correct. Should it be: > > /* X86_TUNE_USE_INCDEC */ > ~(m_PENT4 | m_NOCONA | m_GENERIC), > > ? inc/dec has the same p

Re: Bootstrap is broken on i[345]86-linux

On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 12:17:59AM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On 4/4/07, FX Coudert wrote: > >Bootstrap has been broken since 2007-03-25 on i[345]86-linux. This is > >a decimal float issue reported as PR31344, and is due to a decimal > >float patch, probably the following: > > > >2007-03-23

Re: RFC: Enable __declspec for Linux/x86

On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 03:11:06PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 4/2/07, Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >If the Windows version of GCC has to recognize __declspec to function > >as a hosted compiler on Windows, then the work already needs to be done > >to implement it. So what's the harm

Re: RFC: Enable __declspec for Linux/x86

On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 02:06:15PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 4/2/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Many x86 SSE source codes use __declspec. I'd like to make > >__declspec available for Linux/x86. We can do one of the > >following: > > Do t

RFC: Enable __declspec for Linux/x86

Many x86 SSE source codes use __declspec. I'd like to make __declspec available for Linux/x86. We can do one of the following: 1. Define TARGET_DECLSPEC for Linux/x86. 2. Define TARGET_DECLSPEC for x86. 3. Add -mdeclspec. Any comments? H.J.

Re: 4.3 bootstrap broken on i386-linux

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 02:41:51PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote: > On 3/27/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 12:28:18PM +0200, François-Xavier Coudert wrote: > >> >My nightly bootstrap of mainline on i386-linux failed tonigh

Re: 4.3 bootstrap broken on i386-linux

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 12:28:18PM +0200, François-Xavier Coudert wrote: > >My nightly bootstrap of mainline on i386-linux failed tonight, on > >revision 123192. > > This issue is still not fixed as of now. A diff was posted to PR31344 > with the mention "This isn't a real patch." Is a real patch

Re: --disable-multilib broken on x86_64

On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 01:57:52PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 07:01:40PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > The following change broke --disable-multilib: > > > > 2007-03-23 Michael Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > .

Re: A question on ACX_BUGURL

On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 09:13:30AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Please do this instead: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] "$BUGURL" | sed 's/@/@@/g'`} > Will it work with spaces in $BUGURL? H.J.

Re: A question on ACX_BUGURL

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:20:10PM -, Dave Korn wrote: > On 23 March 2007 18:11, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:55:38PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > >> "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >>> RE

Re: A question on ACX_BUGURL

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:55:38PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > "H. J. Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > REPORT_BUGS_TO="<$1>" > > - REPORT_BUGS_TEXI="@uref{$1}" > > + REPORT_BUGS_TEXI="@uref{`echo $1 |

Re: A question on ACX_BUGURL

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 04:57:03PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > It assumes there is no @ in $1. Shouldn't be > > > > REPORT_BUGS_TEXI="@uref{`echo $1 | sed 's/@/@@/g'`}" > > Feel free

A question on ACX_BUGURL

ACX_BUGURL has [case "$withval" in yes) AC_MSG_ERROR([bug URL not specified]) ;; no) REPORT_BUGS_TO=""; REPORT_BUGS_TEXI="" ;; *) REPORT_BUGS_TO="<$withval>" REPORT_BUGS_TEXI="@uref{`echo $withval | sed 's/@/@@/g'`}" ;; esac]

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.14 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.14 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0322 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree. You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been

Re: We're out of tree codes; now what?

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:29:05AM -0400, Doug Gregor wrote: > On 3/23/07, Kaveh R. GHAZI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >When I brought up the 16-bit option earlier, Jakub replied that x86 would > >get hosed worse because it's 16-bit accesses are not as efficient as it's > >8 or 32 bit ones. > > > >

Re: GCC 4.1.2 generates different pentium instructions

On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 09:19:44PM +0100, fafa wrote: > Hi all, > > I noticed that G++ 4.1.2 (on a Pentium 4) generates different instructions > for > lea0x0(%esi),%esi > or > lea0x0(%edi),%edi > with the same meaning but different encoding depending on the switch > "-momit-leaf-fram

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.13 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.13 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0315 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree. You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been

Re: Massive SPEC failures on trunk

On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 05:27:21PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote: > Most of the problems are fixed, dealII remains with: > > /gcc/spec/sb-balakirew-head-64-2006/x86_64/install-hack/bin/g++ -c -o > quadrature.o -DSPEC_CPU -DNDEBUG -Iinclude -DBOOST_DISABLE_THREADS > -Ddeal_II_dimension=3 -O2 -D

Re: Massive SPEC failures on trunk

On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 02:00:30PM -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On 3/3/07, H. J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [1] 176.gcc and 253.perlbmk usually miscompare for me. Not sure why. > > >176.gcc=default=default=default: > >CPORTABILITY = -Dalloca=_al

Re: Massive SPEC failures on trunk

On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 11:01:40AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: > Grigory Zagorodnev wrote on 03/03/07 02:27: > > > There are three checkins, candidates for the root of regression: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=122487 > > http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=12248

Re: Why use pentium4 for Pentium M?

On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 12:30:16PM +0800, Zuxy Meng wrote: > Hi, > > -march=native choose pentium4 instead of pentium-m for Pentium M processors > (see config/i386/driver-i386.c)? Is this intentional or a typo? > It is because Pentium M implements Pentium instructions. You should get: bash-3.0

Re: 40% performance regression SPEC2006/leslie3d on gcc-4_2-branch

On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 03:53:55PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Richard Guenther wrote: > > >> This is 4.7% drop of SPECfp_base2006 ratio (geomean of individual FP > >> ratios). > > Clearly, 4.7% is significant. Grigory, thanks for the measurements! > > >> Here is the full set of changes in cp

Re: 40% performance regression SPEC2006/leslie3d on gcc-4_2-branch

On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 03:16:12PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Daniel Berlin wrote: > > >> > > > It looks like your changeset listed bellow makes performance > >> > > > regression ~40% on SPEC2006/leslie3d. I will try to create minimal > >> > > > test for this issue this week and update you in a

Re: 40% performance regression SPEC2006/leslie3d on gcc-4_2-branch

On Sat, Feb 17, 2007 at 01:35:28PM +0300, Vladimir Sysoev wrote: > Hello, Daniel > > It looks like your changeset listed bellow makes performance > regression ~40% on SPEC2006/leslie3d. I will try to create minimal > test for this issue this week and update you in any case. > That is a known iss

Re: Performance regression on the 4.3 branch?

On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 02:34:24PM +0100, Paweł Sikora wrote: > François-Xavier Coudert napisał(a): > > >$ gcc -march=pentium4 -O3 a.c && time ./a.out > >064069fbc13963b920219c3e939225e38e38e38e3956d81c71c71c71c0ba0f00 > >./a.out 1.81s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 1.818 total > >$ gcc-4.3 -march=pen

Re: Is compare no longer enabled by default?

On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 09:53:00AM -0800, Joe Buck wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 01:04:05PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 01:00:41PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > "make bootstrap" used to compare stage2 and stage3 after gcc was > > >

Re: ICE in gcc/libgcc2.c:566 (gcc trunk)

On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 01:09:40PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 05:11:15PM +0100, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: > > On 07 Feb 2007 15:36:14 -0800 > > Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Can anybody else out there recreate this

Re: ICE in gcc/libgcc2.c:566 (gcc trunk)

On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 05:11:15PM +0100, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: > On 07 Feb 2007 15:36:14 -0800 > Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Can anybody else out there recreate this on their x86_64 system? > > Not that I could not recreate the segfault but I found a way to hide the > s

Re: Is compare no longer enabled by default?

On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 01:00:41PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > "make bootstrap" used to compare stage2 and stage3 after gcc was > bootstrapped. "make bootstrap" would abort if comparison was failed. > Now, compare stage2 and stage3 is not longer done for > "mak

Is compare no longer enabled by default?

"make bootstrap" used to compare stage2 and stage3 after gcc was bootstrapped. "make bootstrap" would abort if comparison was failed. Now, compare stage2 and stage3 is not longer done for "make bootstrap". Is that intentional? I think it is a very bad idea. H.J.

Re: 27% regression of gcc 4.3 performance on cpu2k6/calculix

On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 05:32:28PM +0300, Vladimir Sysoev wrote: > Hi! > I create test to reproduce issue with cpu2006/454.calculix > See attached. File e_c3d.f contains cutted subroutine from calculix. > tr535.f main entry point of the test. you can use go-script as a > reference how i get these r

Re: not building?

On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 11:19:57AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > I've been seeing: > > /Volumes/mrs5/net/gcc-darwin/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc -B/ > Volumes/mrs5/net/gcc-darwin/./gcc -nostdinc++ -L/Volumes/mrs5/net/gcc- > darwin/i686-apple-darwin9/libstdc++-v3/src -L/Volumes/mrs5/net/gcc- >

Re: trunk rev121458 dont bootstrap

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:03:36AM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > > Hello > > (I don't know if the good mailing list for this is gcc@ or gcc-patches@) > > Apparently trunk rev 121458 don't bootstrap on linux debian sid amd64 ie > x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu > > I'm getting > > make[4]

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.12 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.12 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0128 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. Starting from the 2.17.50.0.4 release, the default output section LMA (load memory address) has changed for allocatable sections

The Linux binutils 2.17.50.0.11 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.17.50.0.11 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2007 0125 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. Starting from the 2.17.50.0.4 release, the default output section LMA (load memory address) has changed for allocatable sections

  1   2   3   4   >