roy rosen writes:
> I am trying to demonstrate my port capabilities.
> I am writing an application which needs to use instructions like max
> a,b,c,d,e,f where a,b,c are inputs and d,e,f are outputs.
> Is that possible to write an intrinsic function for that?
> I think not because that means that
I didn't give the full details of the instruction but for example a
max instruction which gets an array and returns both the max value and
its index in the array will need to return more than one argument.
2010/10/26 Ian Lance Taylor :
> roy rosen writes:
>
>> I am trying to demonstrate my port c
On 10/25/10 02:46, Frederic Riss wrote:
Hi,
The constant propagation pass propagates constants into the
instructions that accept immediates. I'm trying to find if there's
some CSE pass in GCC that would be able to undo this effect when the
constant is used more than once in the function. I look
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Because the int * could point to unaligned data and there is no access
> that would prove otherwise (memcpy accepts any alignment).
As previously discussed, in ISO C storing a pointer in a particular
pointer type or converting to / through that type
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> On 10/25/2010 10:34 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> > By the way, is there some necessity in accomplishing this by means of
> > a linked library, as opposed to via a spawned objcopy process?
(elfcpp isn't a *linked* library; it's a C++ template library
If I want the compiler to understand the inline assembly is it
possible to write define_insn which would match the pattern that GCC
creates for the inline assembly and then GCC would be able to 'know'
some attributes about this insn and would be able to parallelize it?
2010/10/26 roy rosen :
> I d
Hi,
I write a lot of code that emits code and it is a nuisance to try to
keep track of which index values have been initialized and which not.
This initialization extension would be really, really cool and if I
can find some of that mythical "copious spare time" I may provide
a patch:
int foo[
On 10/19/10 14:42, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Jeff Law writes:
Reload has the ability to replace a pseudo with its equivalent memory
location. This is fine and good.
Imagine:
1. We have a pseudo (call is pseudo A) with a read-only memory
equivalent. Pseudo A does not get a hard reg
2.
On 10/26/2010 10:41 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> Well, slow on hosts where process creation is slow (just like the separate
> gcc/cc1/as/collect2/ld/lto-wrapper/... processes). The separate process
> design was probably based on process creation being fast
A lot of this is also historical; gcc
On 10/21/10 22:11, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Paul Koning writes:
To take that example, on the pdp11 an SImode is two HImodes. Could
the RTL template in the MD file for, say, addsi3 split that into two
or three insns that operate on HImode values and describe the actual
instructions? In this c
Mark Mitchell writes:
> A lot of this is also historical; gcc/cc1/as/ld mirror typical UNIX
> compilers of the era at which GCC was built. collect2 was presumably
> necessary because of dependence on proprietary ld; if we could assume
> GNU ld (or GOLD) everywhere, we could fold that functionali
roy rosen writes:
> If I want the compiler to understand the inline assembly is it
> possible to write define_insn which would match the pattern that GCC
> creates for the inline assembly and then GCC would be able to 'know'
> some attributes about this insn and would be able to parallelize it?
Jeff Law writes:
>> If
>> there is any register pressure, B is going to go onto the stack or is
>> going to force something else onto the stack.
> Not today, which is the problem.
Well, I was implicitly anding in the clause "if the compiler were
correct."
Ian
On Oct 25, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 26/10/2010 01:53, Paul Koning wrote:
>> On Oct 25, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Paul Koning
>>> wrote:
Question on movmemm:
Given
extern int *i, *j; void foo (void
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:51:20AM -0400, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> On 10/26/2010 10:41 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>
> > Well, slow on hosts where process creation is slow (just like the separate
> > gcc/cc1/as/collect2/ld/lto-wrapper/... processes). The separate process
> > design was probably ba
On 26/10/2010 17:16, Paul Koning wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> On 26/10/2010 01:53, Paul Koning wrote:
>>> On Oct 25, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Paul Koning
wrote:
> Question on movmemm:
>
> G
On Oct 26, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 26/10/2010 17:16, Paul Koning wrote:
>> On Oct 25, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> What happens if you dereference i and j before the memcpy in foo? Do you
>>> then get int-sized shared alignment in movmemM?
>>>
>>> extern i
Paolo Bonzini schrieb:
> On 10/25/2010 11:35 AM, Georg Lay wrote:
(insn 22 8 23 2 peep2.c:5 (set (reg:SI 15 d15)
(and:SI (reg:SI 4 d4 [ x ])
(const_int -98305 [0xfffe7fff]))) 143
{*and3_zeroes.insert.{SI}.ic}
(nil))
(insn 23 22 21 2 p
roy rosen schrieb:
> Thanks Georg,
> The -fdump-rtl-combine-details really helps.
> Regarding implementing it through cbranchhi4, this is not enough for
> me because when getting to this pattern the operands have already been
> expanded, and I am trying to prevent that.
> Is there a way around it?
On 10/26/2010 07:42 PM, Georg Lay wrote:
I set a break at the end of df_simulate_one_insn_backwards.
CURRENT = *(live->current->bits)
FIRST = *(live->first->bits)
Or call debug_bitmap (). :)
reg 26 (Stackpointer) and reg 27 (return address) do not matter here.
The result ist
insn 10 (CALL)
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> On Oct 26, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> On 26/10/2010 17:16, Paul Koning wrote:
>>> On Oct 25, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
...
What happens if you dereference i and j before the memcpy in foo? Do you
the
Joakim Tjernlund/Transmode wrote on 2010/10/14 15:54:32:
>
> Joakim Tjernlund/Transmode wrote on 2010/10/12 11:00:36:
> >
> > Alan Modra wrote on 2010/10/11 14:58:45:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 11:20:06AM +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > Now I have had a closer look at this and it l
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20101026 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20101026/
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
On 26/10/2010 23:37, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Everything went dead quiet the minute I stated to send patches, what did
> I do wrong?
Nothing, you just ran into the lack-of-manpower problem. Sorry! And I
can't even help, I'm not a ppc maintainer. But you definitely didn't do
anything wrong.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:53:00AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 26/10/2010 23:37, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> > Everything went dead quiet the minute I stated to send patches, what did
> > I do wrong?
>
> Nothing, you just ran into the lack-of-manpower problem. Sorry! And I
> can't even help,
Alan Modra wrote on 2010/10/27 04:01:50:
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:53:00AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> > On 26/10/2010 23:37, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> > > Everything went dead quiet the minute I stated to send patches, what did
> > > I do wrong?
> >
> > Nothing, you just ran into the lac
26 matches
Mail list logo
