Dear Richard,
When I was looking at this problem of tail call optimization, I have
found that _ITM_abortTransaction was not considered as a 'noreturn'
function. Do you have any reason not doing this? If not, I propose to
add ECF_NORETURN in calls.c:special_function_p().
Also I just want to p
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:41 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We made lots of progresses on x32 pABI:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>
> 1. Kernel interface with syscall is close to be finalized.
> 2. GCC x32 branch is stabilizing.
> 3. The Bionic C library works with the syscall kernel in
On 02/15/2011 12:35 AM, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> When I was looking at this problem of tail call optimization, I have
> found that _ITM_abortTransaction was not considered as a 'noreturn'
> function. Do you have any reason not doing this? If not, I propose to
> add ECF_NORETURN in calls.c:special_f
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:57:13PM -0800, Paul Koning wrote:
> > It seems that this proposal would benefit programs that need more than 2 GB
> > but less than 4 GB, and for some reason really don't want 64 bit pointers.
> >
> > This seems like a microscopic
On 02/14/2011 07:00 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:50 PM, David Daney wrote:
On 02/14/2011 06:33 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:22 PM, David Daney wrote:
On 02/14/2011 04:15 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
I have to wonder if it's worth the effort. The primary problem
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Douglas B Rupp wrote:
> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>
> > * Interix (i[34567]86-*-interix3*) (see PR 47096).
>
> I would appreciate it if you could leave Interix. I'll take the responsibility
> to get it working.
The deprecation patch has gone in. That means that your patch to
On Feb 15, 2011, at 12:41 PM, David Daney wrote:
> ...
>>
>>> The main work would be in the compiler toolchain and runtime libraries.
>>
>> You'd also need to update gas for la and dla expansion.
>>
>
> I am counting gas, ld and libc as part of the 'compiler toolchain'
Don't forget GDB.
On Feb 14, 2011, David Daney wrote:
> Current MIPS 32-bit ABIs (both o32 and n32) are restricted to 2GB of
> user virtual memory space. This is due the way MIPS32 memory space is
> segmented. Only the range from 0..2^31-1 is available. Pointer
> values are always sign extended.
> The proposed
On 02/15/2011 09:56 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Feb 14, 2011, David Daney wrote:
Current MIPS 32-bit ABIs (both o32 and n32) are restricted to 2GB of
user virtual memory space. This is due the way MIPS32 memory space is
segmented. Only the range from 0..2^31-1 is available. Pointer
values
On 02/15/2011 09:32 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Joe Buck wrote:
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 05:57:13PM -0800, Paul Koning wrote:
It seems that this proposal would benefit programs that need more than 2 GB but
less than 4 GB, and for some reason really don't want 64 bit pointer
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011, Douglas B Rupp wrote:
Joseph S. Myers wrote:
* Interix (i[34567]86-*-interix3*) (see PR 47096).
I would appreciate it if you could leave Interix. I'll take the responsibility
to get it working.
The deprecation patch has gone in. That means that
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Douglas B Rupp wrote:
> > There are four different target configuration headers used for Interix
> > (i386/i386-interix.h i386/i386-interix3.h interix.h interix3.h). Since
> > there's only one Interix target present in GCC, the abstraction implied by
> > four headers - some o
I am happy to announce that the steering committee has appointed
Rainer Orth and Mike Stump testsuite maintainers.
This has been an area lacking maintainership for a while and the
two of them volunteering is very much appreciated.
As usual, please adjust the MAINTAINERS file accordingly, and
Happ
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20110215 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20110215/
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 Feb 15, 2011, at 2:47 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> I am happy to announce that the steering committee has appointed
> Rainer Orth and Mike Stump testsuite maintainers.
Since I'm sure I can't figure out which patches are outstanding, could anyone
waiting on testsuite approvals or reviews (or des
pr45055 tests a scheduling fix, but on targets that don't support
scheduling (like m32c-elf), gcc emits a warning that scheduling is not
supported. This warning causes the test to fail. How do we bypass
these types of test cases? I don't see a suitable effective_target
for scheduling.
spawn -i
16 matches
Mail list logo
