Hello,
I am learning about memory alignment and noticed that on my x86-64 machine
with GCC 14, a `complex double` has a size of 16 bytes, but an alignment of
only 8 bytes. I am curious as to why this is. Doesn't it run the risk of
ending up with a `complex double` that straddles cache lines?
Tha
> On 11/24/24 11:49 AM, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> > One size doesn't necessarily fit all. Perhaps if you're changing the DCO
> > text for the toolchain projects at this moment, it might be a good time to
> > consider if the Linux DCO text suits your project pe
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330
(IANAL and TINLA, but I've regularly studied this policy issue since the DCO
was first introduced.)
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - he/the
On 2024-10-30 11:45, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi Carlos,
On Wed, 2024-10-30 at 08:32 -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
I can get down to specific requirements and possible solutions for
them, including
things like securing logins with 2FA etc. Which *could* be solved by
Sourceware
today possibly usin
at 10:01 PM David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sun, 2024-09-15 at 15:20 +0330, Ghorban M. Tavakoly via Gcc wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 11:59 AM Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 1:17 PM Ghorban M. Tavakoly via Gcc
> > >
Hi, and thank you for your answer.
Is there an option to have LTO in the final GCC, but without using LTO in
compiling GCC itself?
On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 9:00 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 1:17 PM Ghorban M. Tavakoly via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > >> Is
Hi
On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 11:59 AM Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 1:17 PM Ghorban M. Tavakoly via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Is there any change to have some LTO progress indicator information
> in
> > > upstream GCC outpu
>> Is there any change to have some LTO progress indicator information in
upstream GCC output? Do I need to report a bug?
Is there any chance ... (sorry for typo)
On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 2:41 PM Ghorban M. Tavakoly
wrote:
> I build GCC from git repo regularly. Unfortunately my system i
g?
I need LTO. Is there a way to have LTO in GCC, without LTOing the GCC
itself? This way my builds will be many times faster.
Regards and thanks to your awesome compilers
--
*Ghorban M. Tavakoly*
Phone number: +98 (902) (2²⁰+2¹⁹+2¹⁸+…+2²+2¹+2⁰)
Hi Gcc Team,
I am trying to download gcc compiler but didn't download the compiler
please give me solution, how to do download this?
Regards,
Dinesh M
Hi Martin,
I wanted to write GSoC proposal on Improve nothrow Detection in GCC, . What
are the main points to be added in proposal ?
Hi Martin,
I wanted to write GSoC proposal on Improve nothrow Detection in GCC, . What
are the main points to be added in proposal
Thanks, I'll check them out.
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024, 9:50 pm Martin Jambor, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, Mar 24 2024, M Hamza Nadeem via Gcc wrote:
> > Hi Sir / mam,
> >
> >
> > I hope this email finds you well. As an enthusiastic contributor with a
> >
.
Thank you for considering my interest, and I look forward to your response.
Warm regards,
M Hamza Nadeem
ldron.
Let me know if any of you are interested in this, and I can put you in touch
with the staff at SFC who orgainze FOSSY.
Let me know!
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - he/them
Policy Fellow & Hacker-in-Residence at Software Freedom Conservancy
Hi
I think I found libstdc++ bug and I tried to report to Bugzilla but "user
account creation has been restricted".
So I'm going to report it here in hope that someone with a account could report
it to Bugzilla if they seem it fit.
Using gcc 13.2 with -std=c++23 code below (https://godbolt.org
On 2022-06-22, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 11:52 PM m wrote:
Hello!
I maintain a fork of GCC which adds support for my custom CPU ISA,
MRISC32 (the machine description can be found here:
https://github.com/mrisc32/gcc-mrisc32/tree/mbitsnbites/mrisc32/gcc/config/mrisc32
I'm sorry about the messed up code formatting (I blame the WYSIWYG). I
hope the message gets through anyway (have a look at the Compiler
Explorer link - https://godbolt.org/z/drzfjsxf7 - it has all the code).
/Marcus
Hello!
I maintain a fork of GCC which adds support for my custom CPU ISA,
MRISC32 (the machine description can be found here:
https://github.com/mrisc32/gcc-mrisc32/tree/mbitsnbites/mrisc32/gcc/config/mrisc32
).
I recently discovered that scaled index addressing (i.e. MEM[base +
index * sca
Greetings,
I am M V V S Manoj Kumar, an Open Source Contributor to Rust-GCC (GitHub
<https://github.com/mvvsmk/>, contributions
<https://github.com/Rust-GCC/gccrs/pulls?q=is%3Apr+author%3Amvvsmk+is%3Aclosed>),
and I want to pursue a GSoC project regarding constant folding in Rust
Уважаемый господин / госпожа,
Комплимент сезона,
Я надеюсь, это электронное письмо дойдет до тебя.
Я хотел бы поговорить с вами о бизнесе и инвестициях.
Надеюсь услышать ваш положительный ответ.
С уважением,
party software any porting
effort or contribution should probably go through the upstream LLVM project to
avoid forking.
Don't let that stop you from developing a port though.
--
Stephen M. Webb
me of what I've written may be useful
as GCC considers how to build long-term robust plans to assure that the
copyleft of GCC is upheld for the long-term.
--
Bradley M. Kuhn - he/him
Policy Fellow & Hacker-in-Residence at Software Freed
But GPL3 has been a good license for GCC; giving up the theoretical ability
to change the license (other than to a later GPL) does not seem like a
significant loss.
That will cause trouble incorperating code or documentation snippets
from the code base into the GCC manual; which is not un
> What is the rationale after these changes anyway?
Development of new features for libstdc++ has already moved away from
gcc.gnu.org to avoid the copyright assignment. Other contributors have
expressed a desire to do the same.
>From the GCC mission statement:
- Other components
GCC was created as part of the GNU Project but has grown to operate as
an autonomous project.
That is true for all GNU project.
The GCC Steering Committee has decided to relax the requirement to
assign copyright for all changes to the Free Software Foundation. GCC
will continue to
DF or XML or an HTML tarball)
GCC 11.1 Standard C++ Library Reference Manual (also in PDF or XML GPL
or XML GFDL or an HTML tarball)
...
The remaining items under "GCC 11.1 manuals" seem to be OK.
Thank you for your indispensable work
Regards
Pablo M. Ronchi
It should remain an acronym, but it should now stand for "GCC Compiler
Collection". That allows the project to be disassociated from the GNU
name while still subtly acknowledging its heritage.
Then it would not longer be GCC. It would be something different.
The whole point of GCC is to
Please move these off-topic discussions somewhere else, people are
already annoyed and angry as it is -- on both sides!
These discussions are slightly off topic for gcc@, I'd suggest they
are moved to gnu-misc-discuss@ or some other more suitable list.
To me GNU is people wanting to create a software system that respects
users freedom according to the GNU Social Contract:
https://wiki.gnu.tools/gnu:social-
"We've always done it this way" is not necessarily a good defence of an
existing practice.
That wasn't the claim, it is how we do it currently, and have been
doing for decades though. If you have concrete suggestions, please
send them to the GNU Advisory Committee.
> Â Â The GNU Assemb
[...] That "gnu-stucture" document was written by RMS a couple of
months ago and doesn't represent how the GNU project and its
maintainers have worked for years.
It reflects the same message that has been sent to new GNU maintainers
for the decades. The GNU structure and organization doc
I ("new moderator") won't recount what happened, it is neither here,
or there, but Mark is presenting a very biased view of what occured,
and also one of the reasons why he no longer is a moderator.
The claims about doxxing, etc, are entierly untrue and unfounded.
A good reason why Richard should be on the SC is to that he does
demonstrates the values of the GNU project, that of the free software
movement and the FSF. GCC is a important project, and having the head
of the GNU project involved -- even if mostly uninvolved in daily
topics, is a ultimately a g
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 08:22:26PM +, Alexander Yermolovich wrote:
> On llvm side of compiler world there has been work done by Igor Kudrin to
> enable DWARF64.
> I am trying to add a flag to Clang to enable DWARF64 generation.
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D90507
> In review David Blaikie point
Hello!
I am trying to get movmodecc (movsicc) going for my MRISC32 machine
description, but I am unable to get GCC to use my define_expand pattern.
I have tried different variants, but here is one example that I think
should work:
(define_expand "movsicc"
[(set (match_operand:SI 0
On 2020-02-07 16:44, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 03:41:25PM +0100, m wrote:
...so I tried to write a corresponding matching pattern, like so:
(define_insn "smulhshi3"
[(set (match_operand:HI 0 "register_operand" "=r")
(tru
<#part type=message/rfc822 disposition=inline raw=t>
X-From-Line: r...@gnu.org Tue Feb 4 23:28:18 2020
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [209.51.188.10])
by localhost (mpop-1.0.28) with POP3
for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:28:18 +0100
Return-path:
Envelope-to: a...@g
Hello!
I am trying to implement the following insns for my back end: smulhssi3,
smulhshi3, smulhsqi3
According to [1], the operation should be equivalent to:
narrow op0, op1, op2;
op0 = (narrow) (((wide) op1 * (wide) op2) >> (N / 2 - 1));
...so I tried to write a corresponding matching p
Please feel free to share with other groups as appropriate.
The form requires non-free software and Google malware. Please do not
recommend that people share such things on GNU project lists.
Den 2019-11-12 kl. 19:54, skrev Jeff Law:
On 11/12/19 11:29 AM, m wrote:
Hello gcc developers!
I am working on a new back end for my MRISC32 ISA [1], and I'm still very
new to gcc internals. I suspect that I will have more questions further
down the road, but let's start with
Hello gcc developers!
I am working on a new back end for my MRISC32 ISA [1], and I'm still very
new to gcc internals. I suspect that I will have more questions further
down the road, but let's start with this topic...
The MRISC32 ISA has instructions for setting a register based on the
outcome o
Provenance : Courrier pour Windows 10
Myers.
I found this idea interesting and really possible for me. But
I'm finding difficulty in proposing the the project as i never worked for
Open source soft wares.Would you Please help me with more description for
the idea or with some suggestion?
Thank you.
--
Chethan M
De
hi
i am a java developer, i want to install gnu java compiler on LINUX
7.2 for testing purpose. i already have gcc version 4.8.5 20150623
(Red Hat 4.8.5-4) (GCC) in my machine. now i want to add gcj in it.
how can i install it?
--
regards
jahanzeb
Hello,
I have write, open and read statements in a fortran program and compile as,
gfortran -c test.f90
and create a dll with
gfortran -shared test.dll -o test.o
I import this dll in C# with dllimport and call one of the routine. After
the call the program hangs on write(*,*) statement.
May I
rch 5, 2015 7:42 PM
To: Jeff Law
Cc: Zamyatin, Igor; Iyer, Balaji V; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Tannenbaum, Barry M; H.J.
Lu; Jakub Jelinek
Subject: Re: Listing a maintainer for libcilkrts, and GCC's Cilk Plus
implementation generally?
Hi!
On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 13:39:44 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 0
- Have them distributed (automake's default). This means that
they will be build in the srcdir, not in the builddir: of
course, this only affects the maintainer, since for a user that
builds the package from a tarball those files should *not* be
rebuilt, hence ther
There's a very basic GCC front-end for LLVM-IR at
http://gcc-llvmir.googlecode.com, which has some support for
using clang to generate the LLVM IR. It might be usable as a starting
point for an OpenCL front-end, assuming that the OpenCL parser made it
into clang.
Matthew
configure.guess:
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
gcc -v:
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/ad3/gma/go-gcc-build/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.6.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /ad3/gma/go-build-work/gcc-4.6.0/configure
--prefix=/ad3/gm
>You are being denied by RMS. He controls the copyright, the SC has
>no legal say, and he's stubborn as hell.
>
> When presented with weak arguments, then yes he will be stubborn
> but rightly so.
>
> I don't see what the problem is with two manuals, from a users
> I have read the thread in full, and I do not see the problem with
> keeping that info in a seperate manual; GCC has so many options
> for various architectures and systems that I think it makes
> technical sense to have a "Invoking GCC" manual.
And what about libstdc++ API docs, w
You probably haven't read this thread fully, or you wouldn't imply
that GCC should have an "options manual" separate from the user's
manual.
I have read the thread in full, and I do not see the problem with
keeping that info in a seperate manual; GCC has so many options for
various archit
> > So one way to move forward is to effectively have two manuals,
> > one containing traditional user-written text (GFDL), the other
> > containing generated text (GPL). If you print it out as a
> > book, the generated part would just appear as an appendix to
> > the manual, it's "
Please move such unconstructive arguments elsewhere.
Hello all, hello Richard and thank you for your help.
On Wed, 30.06.2010 08:57, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 05:06 AM, M. -Eqbal Maraqa wrote:
> > f1.c:5:1: error: unrecognizable insn:
> > (insn 12 11 13 3 f1.c:4
> >(set (mem/c/i:SI (reg/f:SI 23 [ D
Hello,
I'm working on a new gcc target and trying to implement call_value.
When compiling (-O0 -S) the following c code :
int f1(int a, int b)
{
int tmp = a + b;
return tmp;
}
void main()
{
int a = 10;
int b = 20;
int c;
c = f1(a,b);
}
I get the followi
> Therefore, if I don't have an update "soon" (within a week or two), I'd
> suggest that we operate under the assumption that it will not be
> possible to combine GFDL manuals and GPL code in the near future.
I think it should be possible, Emacs does something similar I think.
However
I suggest you raise this with lice...@gnu.org.
Not sure where to send this, who is responsible for the mail server
for gcc.gnu.org?
--- Start of forwarded message ---
Subject: [gnu.org #572859] [gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org: ezmlm warning]
From: "Ward Vandewege via RT"
To: a...@gnu.org
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 10:28:41 -0400
> [...@gnu.o
1) The back-and-forth is too much for casual contributors. If it is
more effort to do the legal work than to submit the first patch,
then they will never submit any patch at all.
Please do not exaggerate, if people have time for threads like these,
then they have time to send a short emai
People will always find reasons to complain, but most people (and
companies) seem to be happy with how the copyright assignments look
today.
As for flexible, it seems clear that the current form is not
sufficiently personalized, which makes it more difficult to get it
signed by an employer.
If you need something specific, you should contact le...@gnu.org.
They are quite flexible, I do not know where people got the idea that
th
> That is more or less what a potentional contributor gets via
> email when submitting a patch. I don't see how a web form would
> make things different.
True, but I think it would make a significant difference if the web
form could be filled out online without requiring a piece of
> And how are potential contributors supposed to know this?
They're really not. The fundamental problem here is that this area of
the law is not only very complicated, but is really all guesswork
since there are few, if any, relevant cases. Moreover, this is an
area of the law whe
>Given that there are plenty of high-profile projects out there
>which seem to be entirely safe in the absence of copyright
>assignment policies, why, exactly, does GCC need one to be
>"legally safe"?
>
> I do not know what high-profile projects you are refering t
It's unclear whether the LLVM-style implicit copyright assignment
is really enforceable, and this certainly isn't a forum to debate
it. In any case, it doesn't really matter, because the only reason
copyright needs to be assigned (AFAIK) is to change the license.
This is not the only
Wouldn't contributing a patch to be read by the person who will be
solving the problem, but without transferring of rights, introduce
risk or liability for the FSF and GCC?
That risk always exists; some level of trust has to exist somewhere.
> If I have the rights to re-license software, and I re-license the
> software, why do I not have permission to enforce these rights?
Because you have the permission to re-DISTRIBUTE (not "re-LICENSE")
the software and nothing else.
In case of GCC, you have the explicit permission to
>You are still open to liabilities for your own project, if you
>incorporate code that you do not have copyright over, the original
>copyright holder can still sue you
That's irrlevent. By signing the FSF's document I'd be doing
nothing to reduce anyone's ability to sue me, I could
> Years ago, I was asked to sign one of these documents for some
> public domain code I wrote that I never intended to become part
> of a FSF project. Someone wanted to turn it a regular GNU
> project with a GPL license, configure scripts, a cute acronym and
> all that stuff. I sai
The FSF copyright assignments grant you back ultimate rights to use
it in anyway you please.
> Not much can be done to either of those, the copyright assignments are
> necessary to keep GCC legally safe.
Given that there are plenty of high-profile projects out there
which seem to be entirely safe in the absence of copyright
assignment policies, why, exactly, does GCC need o
IANAL but the copyright assignment is probably necessary for the
FSF to have the rights to change the license at will (within the
limitations allowed by the copyright assignment). If there are many
copyright holders, like for say the linux kernel, a change of
license requires the app
I have a script that allows me to do the following in a single step:
gccfarming cleanup
gccfarming bootstrap
gccfarming patch PATCH=mypatch.diff
gccfarming bootstrap
compare_tests clean.log mypatch.log
That seems useful, could you post a copy of it somewhere?
The big reason the copyright assignment. I never even bothered to
read it, but as I don't get anything in return there's no point.
Why should put obligaitons on myself, open myself up to even
unlikely liabilities, just so my patches can merged into the
official source distribution?
My personal opinion is that this legal reason is a *huge*
bottleneck against external contributions. In particular, because
you need to deal with it *before* submitting any patch, which,
given the complexity (4MLOC) and growth rate (+30% in two years) of
GCC, means in practice that p
legal reasons. The default disclaimer is nonsense, it is hard to find an
employer willing to sign a sensible disclaimer, and even when you have a
nice employer it can still take months (years?) to get things through the
FSF.
If it takes a long time, please contact r...@gnu.org or as
If the dragonegg and/or LLVM copyright was assigned to the FSF, which
is a prerequisit for anything included in GCC and not what license the
program is under currently, then I'm quite sure that the GCC
maintainers would be more than happy to include both.
Since it is possible to use the 0b prefix to specify a binary
number in GCC/C++, will there be any resistance to add %b format
specifier to the printf family format strings?
You can do that yourself by using the hook facility for printf, see
(libc) Customizing Printf in the GNU C library
Hi,
Based on the following conversations in binutils and gcc mailing
list, we understand that there is no support for VLE code for PowerPC
port.
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2008-05/msg00153.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2009-04/msg00201.html
We are planning to support the same in binu
On 11/19/2009 04:30 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 18:19 +0530, M. Mohan Kumar wrote:
Are VTA patches part of mainline gcc now? If not, where could we get the
VTA patches?
The VTA implementation is in mainline gcc now. There are also some
backports to gcc 4.4, like the gcc
On 05/29/2009 03:11 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
(Resent, now actually subscribed to the list from the correct address)
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 14:28 +0530, M. Mohan Kumar wrote:
That's all true in the abstract, but modern gcc has been known to
abscond with variable location data even for v
> a) discussions of licensing issues are off topic on this mailing list
>
> b) you should ignore all such discussions, since they invariablly
> � include lots of legal-sounding opinions from people who are not
> � lawyers and don't know, and often have significant misconceptions.
Please take this up with le...@gnu.org.
However, I really implore you: by all means link statically to
everything else, but leave libc dynamically linked. I'm not aware
of any reason not to link libc dynamically, and not doing so leads
to a ton of problems.
Problems also arise if one uses functions that use NSS (eg. getXbyY
Esben Mose Hansen writes:
> this program SEGFAULTs
>
> #include
>
> int main() {
> int numbers[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 };
> const std::size_t nn = sizeof(numbers)/sizeof(int);
> int sum = 0;
> int f = 5;
> std::for_each(&numbers[0], &numbers[nn], [&] (int n) {
> sum +=
To solve the above issue, can I use the "define_peephole2" insn pattern?
No. At most you could abuse it to hide the issue some of the time.
You probably have one or more of your target macros / hooks wrong,
e.g. HARD_REGNO_NREGS.
Thank you very much for your reply. In my case, code generation
Hello,
I have ported gcc to a 16-bit target. Now problem is, gcc generates wrong code
with -O1 and above optimization for move and load/store instructions, b using
the 32-bit registers with 16-bit instructions. For ex:
===
move r13, r1 // move 0-15 bit to r1 register
move r13, r0 // move 16-31
However, a proportion of code written for Visual C++
makes use of
propriatery runtimes such as MFC, the runtime EULA of which 'currently'
prevents the use of MFC
based applications with a 'free' OS like ReactOS or GNU based toolchains...
And even if it were permitted, it wou
Today I happened across something that made me scratch my head.
Perhaps you can help me understand. Or maybe it's a bug.
ada.h contains the following preprocessor juju:
#ifdef __STDC__
#define CAT(A,B) A##B
#else
#define _ECHO(A) A
#define CAT(A,B) ECHO(A)B
#endif
For the non-__STDC__ case, w
Hello,
I am trying to build the gcc tools on cygwin host. But the build failed with
below errors:
$ gcc -I../../../trunk/libdecnumber -I. -g -O2 -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstr
ict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-format-att
ribute -Wcast-qual -pedantic -Wn
Hello,
I am building the gcc tools using the gcc trunk sources and my configuration is:
=
/gcc/trunk/configure --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --host=i686-pc-mingw32
--prefix=/release --target=crx-elf --disable-nls --enable-languages=c,c++
--disable-libssp --with-mpfr=/scratch/mpfr-2.3.1/rel --with-
Hello,
I am trying the build the crx-elf target gcc compiler tools from gcc trunk
sources, but the below error message displayed.
Could any one suggest the reason for build fail?
===Error log
In file included from /trunk/gcc/sel-sched-dump.c:37:
/trunk/gcc/sel-sched-ir.h:93: error: ex
Andrew Haley wrote:
Paul M. Dubuc wrote:
Andrew Haley wrote:
Paul M. Dubuc wrote:
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
GCC 4.2.4 has been released.
GCC 4.2.4 is a bug-fix release, containing fixes for regressions in
GCC 4.2.3 relative to previous GCC releases. This release
Andrew Haley wrote:
Paul M. Dubuc wrote:
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
GCC 4.2.4 has been released.
GCC 4.2.4 is a bug-fix release, containing fixes for regressions in
GCC 4.2.3 relative to previous GCC releases. This release is
available from the FTP servers listed at:
http
this
release without any success. How do I find this information about a
given release?
Thanks,
--
Paul M. Dubuc
>> I think the mistake is to have them (git & hg) hosted on
>> the same machine as svn. Having them on "hg.gcc.gnu.org"
>> and "git.gcc.gnu.org" would allow to split the load between
>> machines (even if "hg.gcc.gnu.org" and "git.gcc.gnu.org"
>> are the same
> I think the mistake is to have them (git & hg) hosted on the
> same machine as svn. Having them on "hg.gcc.gnu.org" and
> "git.gcc.gnu.org" would allow to split the load between machines
> (even if "hg.gcc.gnu.org" and "git.gcc.gnu.org" are the same
> machines originally).
1 - 100 of 162 matches
Mail list logo
