Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-07-02 Thread Matthew Wahab
On 02/07/15 13:40, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: I'd like to get the fix for PR target/65697 (weak memory barriers for __sync builtins on ARMv8) into GCC-5.2. I'd also like to see the ARM patches backported please unless there are RM objec

Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-07-02 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 22/06/15 12:56, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> >> I plan to release GCC 5.2.0 around July 10th which means a release >> candidate being done around July 3rd. >> >> Please check your open regression bugs for ones that eligible for >> backporti

Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-07-02 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, Matthew Wahab wrote: > On 22/06/15 12:56, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > I plan to release GCC 5.2.0 around July 10th which means a release > > candidate being done around July 3rd. > > > > Please check your open regression bugs for ones that eligible for > > backporting. Als

Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-07-02 Thread Matthew Wahab
On 22/06/15 12:56, Richard Biener wrote: I plan to release GCC 5.2.0 around July 10th which means a release candidate being done around July 3rd. Please check your open regression bugs for ones that eligible for backporting. Also please help getting the P1 bug count to zero (there is still the

Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-07-01 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, Jason Merrill wrote: > I'm interested in your thoughts on fixing c++/65945 in 5.2. > > It's trivial to fix the alignment of nullptr_t, but I was concerned about ABI > impact. On further research it seems that it won't cause any trouble with > argument alignment, since that d

Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-06-30 Thread Jason Merrill
I'm interested in your thoughts on fixing c++/65945 in 5.2. It's trivial to fix the alignment of nullptr_t, but I was concerned about ABI impact. On further research it seems that it won't cause any trouble with argument alignment, since that doesn't seem to rely on TYPE_ALIGN at all; I think

Re: GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22) - Architecture maintainers please have a look

2015-06-23 Thread Andreas Krebbel
Hi, I would like to commit the IBM z13 support patchset before that. >From a common code perspective it is: recog: Increased max number of alternatives - v2 https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg02059.html optabs: Fix vec_perm -> V16QI middle end lowering. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat

GCC 5.1.1 Status Report (2015-06-22)

2015-06-22 Thread Richard Biener
Status == I plan to release GCC 5.2.0 around July 10th which means a release candidate being done around July 3rd. Please check your open regression bugs for ones that eligible for backporting. Also please help getting the P1 bug count to zero (there is still the ARM aligned argument passin