On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
> --disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use --disable-shared, I
> get this:
>
> /home/iant/gnu/ppl-0.10.2-install/lib/libppl_c.a(ppl_c_implementation_common.o):
> In
- Original Message
> From: Jamie Prescott
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 11:59:23 PM
> Subject: Code generation problem with optimizations enabled
> If I disable the optimizations, everything is fine and the 'fcmp' is there.
> Even with optimizations enabled, the RT
2009/5/12 Arthur Schwarz:
>
> Program and particulars below.
>
> When line 27 is commented out, line 26 is output. When line 27 is not
> commented, line 26 is not output except that if x.file contains a line feed
> the null line line 26 & line 27 are output. If x.file does not contain a line
> f
Hi,
I found that the tree dump (xxx.c.t00.tu file) with -fdump-tree-all
flag is incomplete in gcc-4.1.2. And the tree-dump.c is not modified
for this bug up to 4.4.0.
When a function body contains a for-statement or if-statement, the
stmt-list will break, and the rest of the function body is lost
> What I noticed is that if I CC_STATUS_INIT (in xxx_notice_update_cc()) even
> for insn that
> do not require it (that are almost all of them - being only cmp/fcmp/test
> that modify cc0),
> cmpdf gets emitted regularly.
If so, you should not be using cc0, but a CCmode register instead.
See fo
Hello All
In the current plugin API, the function register_callback is used to
register callback routines (eg PLUGIN_FINISH_UNIT) in which case the
callback is expected to be a routine. But this same function
register_callback is used also to register some data to plugins, without
any call ba
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I'm having some trouble building the Graphite support.
>
> Using ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/ppl-0.10.2.tar.gz :
>
> * Unlike gcc, does not support a --with-gmp option.
> + Does support a --with-libgmpxx-prefix option.
> * If
2009/5/12 Basile STARYNKEVITCH :
> Hello All
>
> In the current plugin API, the function register_callback is used to
> register callback routines (eg PLUGIN_FINISH_UNIT) in which case the
> callback is expected to be a routine. But this same function
> register_callback is used also to register so
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Subject says it all, I guess.
And so it does now. wwwdocs was also updated.
Paolo
Hello.
First I apologize for my english but I'm french and sometimes I make
mistakes.
I have to create a file containing some informations by processing C++
code source for work.
But why create a whole lexical analyzer while I can use the intermediate
representation tree of GCC ?
To do it, I'
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 22:58, Justin Seyster wrote:
> Unless that's not a good place to put plug-in passes, I propose
> giving the pass_all_optimizations pass the name "all_optimizations."
> I believe that there are a handful of other unnamed passes that might
> also be useful for plug-in dev
Hi Alison,
This issue is not specific to Fortran, but it's specific to Darwin
(you say that "the large object files have been observed on many other
platforms", but could you give a list of such platforms?):
$ cat a.c
int x[999] = { 0 };
$ gcc -c a.c && ls -lh a.o
-rw-r--r-- 1 fx whee
Nicolas COLLIN wrote:
> Hello.
Hi again Nicolas,
> I have to create a file containing some informations by processing C++
> code source for work.
> But why create a whole lexical analyzer while I can use the intermediate
> representation tree of GCC ?
> To do it, I'm going to introduce a foncti
A few people asked me to do a new comparison of GCC releases and LLVM as
the new GCC release and LLVM were out recently.
You can find the comparison on http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/
The comparison for x86 (32-bit mode) was done on Pentium4 and for
x86_64 (64-bit mode) on Core I7.
S
Thank you Paolo, I'll take a look at it.
Is there a reason why the fcmp insn was dropped with such implementation?
- Jamie
- Original Message
> From: Paolo Bonzini
> To: Jamie Prescott
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:31:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Code generation pr
Fengzhe Zhang writes:
> I found that the tree dump (xxx.c.t00.tu file) with -fdump-tree-all
> flag is incomplete in gcc-4.1.2. And the tree-dump.c is not modified
> for this bug up to 4.4.0.
>
> When a function body contains a for-statement or if-statement, the
> stmt-list will break, and the res
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I'm having some trouble building the Graphite support.
Using ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/ppl-0.10.2.tar.gz :
* Unlike gcc, does not support a --with-gmp option.
+ Does support a --with-libgmpxx-prefix option.
What is the trouble with this? I mean, is it
Janis Johnson wrote:
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
--disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use --disable-shared, I
get this:
/home/iant/gnu/ppl-0.10.2-install/lib/libppl_c.a(ppl_c_implementation_co
- Original Message
> From: Paolo Bonzini
> To: Jamie Prescott
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:31:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Code generation problem with optimizations enabled
>
> > What I noticed is that if I CC_STATUS_INIT (in xxx_notice_update_cc()) even
> for insn
On May 12, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
A few people asked me to do a new comparison of GCC releases and
LLVM as the new GCC release and LLVM were out recently.
You can find the comparison on http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/
The comparison for x86 (32-bit mode) was done o
Roberto Bagnara writes:
> Janis Johnson wrote:
>> On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
>>> --disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use --disable-shared, I
>>> get this:
>>>
>>> /home/iant/gnu/ppl-0.10.2
Chris Lattner wrote:
On May 12, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
A few people asked me to do a new comparison of GCC releases and LLVM
as the new GCC release and LLVM were out recently.
You can find the comparison on http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/
The comparison for x86 (32
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Chris Lattner wrote:
> 1. I have a hard time understanding the code size numbers. Does 10% mean that
> GCC is generating 10% bigger or 10% smaller code than llvm?
I have a different comment on the code size numbers: could we have
comparisons of code size for -Os rather than
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Chris Lattner wrote:
1. I have a hard time understanding the code size numbers. Does 10% mean that
GCC is generating 10% bigger or 10% smaller code than llvm?
I have a different comment on the code size numbers: could we have
comparisons o
Roberto Bagnara writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> I'm having some trouble building the Graphite support.
>>
>> Using ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/ppl-0.10.2.tar.gz :
>>
>> * Unlike gcc, does not support a --with-gmp option.
>> + Does support a --with-libgmpxx-prefix option.
>
> W
On May 12, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Chris Lattner wrote:
On May 12, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
A few people asked me to do a new comparison of GCC releases and
LLVM as the new GCC release and LLVM were out recently.
You can find the comparison on http://vmak
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 18:46 +0200, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> Any suggestion about how to improve the PPL is welcome. This, of course,
> applies also to the build machinery.
Hi Roberto,
I added some instructions on how to build to the GCC wiki (end of page):
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite_Build
Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Chris Lattner wrote:
2. You change two variables in your configurations: micro
architecture and pointer size. Would you be willing to run x86-32
Core i7 numbers as well? LLVM in particular is completely untuned
for the (really old and quirky) "netburst" architecture,
Laurent GUERBY writes:
> Looking more at cloog-ppl/configure I find stuff like:
>
> <<
> # Check whether --with-ppl or --without-ppl was given.
> if test "${with_ppl+set}" = set; then
> withval="$with_ppl"
>
> fi;
>
>
> # Check whether --with-polylib_prefix or --without-polylib_prefix was given
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 21:31 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
>
> > Looking more at cloog-ppl/configure I find stuff like:
> >
> > <<
> > # Check whether --with-ppl or --without-ppl was given.
> > if test "${with_ppl+set}" = set; then
> > withval="$with_ppl"
> >
> > fi;
> >
Laurent GUERBY writes:
> So 0.15.3 configure does not set $with_ppl variable at all.
Sure it does. Look at the argument parsing loop.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely d
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 21:49 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Laurent GUERBY writes:
>
> > So 0.15.3 configure does not set $with_ppl variable at all.
>
> Sure it does. Look at the argument parsing loop.
I added a dump and $with_ppl is indeed set correctly but $ppl_prefix
(which is used for -I if
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 18:46 +0200, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> Janis Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> >> Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
> >> --disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use --disable-shared, I
> >> get thi
Great! I actually got around to submitting a patch before the
weekend, but Andrew Pinski noted that naming these passes results in
some unwanted dump files. I plan to have a patch ready soon to fix
that up.
--Justin
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23,
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 14:18, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I'm having some trouble building the Graphite support.
>
> Using ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure/ppl-0.10.2.tar.gz :
>
> * Unlike gcc, does not support a --with-gmp option.
> + Does support a --with-libgmpxx-prefix option.
> * If G
> It would also be very interesting to include LLVM's LTO support, which gives
> a pretty dramatic win on SPEC. However, I don't know how difficult it is to
> use on linux (on the mac, you just pass -O4 at compile time, and everything
> works). I've heard that Gold has a new plugin to make LTO tr
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> 2. You change two variables in your configurations: micro architecture and
> pointer size. Would you be willing to run x86-32 Core i7 numbers as well?
> LLVM in particular is completely untuned for the (really old and quirky)
> "netburst" a
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20090512 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20090512/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
>> 3. Your SPEC FP benchmarks tell me two things: GCC 4.4's fortran support is
>> dramatically better than 4.2's (which llvm 2.5 uses), and your art/mgrid
>> hacks apparently do great stuff :).
>
> Something like the "art hack" is in ipa-struct-reorg, but it is not
> enabled at any level. If gcc
39 matches
Mail list logo
