On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 4:44 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> Here is the updated patch to get proper HOST_WIDE_INT bits and 1
>>> through a new file, opt-gen.c. OK for trunk?
>>
>> Using another generator
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> Here is the updated patch to get proper HOST_WIDE_INT bits and 1
>> through a new file, opt-gen.c. OK for trunk?
>
> Using another generator program like this can't be the best approach
> (apart from
On Thu, 4 Aug 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Here is the updated patch to get proper HOST_WIDE_INT bits and 1
> through a new file, opt-gen.c. OK for trunk?
Using another generator program like this can't be the best approach
(apart from anything else, when built for the build system hwint.h should
re
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:08 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> ; Maximum number of mask bits in a variable.
>>> MaxMaskBits
>>> ix86_isa_flags = 64
>>>
>>> It mark ix86_isa_flags as 64bit. Any comments?
>>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> ; Maximum number of mask bits in a variable.
>> MaxMaskBits
>> ix86_isa_flags = 64
>>
>> It mark ix86_isa_flags as 64bit. Any comments?
>
> The patch won't work as is. set_option, for example, cast
On 07/27/2011 06:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
+ if (max == 64)
+ var_mask_1[var] = "1LL"
This must be ((HOST_WIDE_INT)1).
Paolo
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:37 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> ; Maximum number of mask bits in a variable.
>>> MaxMaskBits
>>> ix86_isa_flags = 64
>>>
>>> It mark ix86_isa_flags as 64bit. Any comments?
>>
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> ; Maximum number of mask bits in a variable.
>> MaxMaskBits
>> ix86_isa_flags = 64
>>
>> It mark ix86_isa_flags as 64bit. Any comments?
>
> The patch won't work as is. set_option, for example, cast
On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
> ; Maximum number of mask bits in a variable.
> MaxMaskBits
> ix86_isa_flags = 64
>
> It mark ix86_isa_flags as 64bit. Any comments?
The patch won't work as is. set_option, for example, casts a pointer to
(int *), and stores a mask that came from option->v
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
As you may see pta_flags enum in i386.c is almost full. So there is a
risk of overflow in quite near future. Comment in source code advises
"widen struct pta flags" which is now
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> As you may see pta_flags enum in i386.c is almost full. So there is a
>>> risk of overflow in quite near future. Comment in source code advises
>>> "widen struct pta flags" which is now defined as unsigned. But it
>>> looks not optimal.
>>>
>>>
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Igor Zamyatin writes:
>
>> As you may see pta_flags enum in i386.c is almost full. So there is a
>> risk of overflow in quite near future. Comment in source code advises
>> "widen struct pta flags" which is now defined as unsigned. But it
12 matches
Mail list logo
