> I'll take a look.
Thanks. The stack usage reported through current_function_static_stack_size
by the back-end must comprise the amount of stack from just before the call to
after the stack is established. For example on i386:
eric@polaris:> cat t.c
int main (void)
{
return 0;
}
eric@pola
On 09/05/16 22:45, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Mon, 9 May 2016, Rich Felker wrote:
>
>>> Done. I never understood why they left in the hugely unuseful
>>> {sig,}{set,long}jmp() but removed the actually useful *context()
>>> (amended somehow like above).
>>
>> Because those are actually part of the
On Mon, 2016-05-09 at 12:25 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >
> > The *context APIs are deprecated and I'm not sure they're worth
> > supporting with this. It would be a good excuse to get people to stop
> > using them.
>
> The gccgo library
Hi,
On Tue, 10 May 2016, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> setjmp is defined so that the compiler can treat it
> specially and the caller has to make sure certain
> objects are volatile, cannot appear in arbitrary
> places (e.g. in the declaration of a vla), longjmp
> must be in same thread etc.
>
> all th
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> This sounds like a good use of --with-build-sysroot instead of just
> --with-sysroot.
> I use the following for the candian cross:
> --with-sysroot=/ --with-build-sysroot=${SYSROOT}
Hi Andrew! Thanks for your comment.
I thought that --with-b
Hi all,
I'm taking a stab at fixing PR 22141 by merging adjacent stores into wider
stores in a late gimple pass.
My current plan is to go through all the assignments in a basic block and keep
track of
LHS expressions that are COMPONENT_REF, BIT_FIELD_REF, ARRAY_REF or
ARRAY_RANGE_REF until
we
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm taking a stab at fixing PR 22141 by merging adjacent stores into wider
> stores in a late gimple pass.
>
> My current plan is to go through all the assignments in a basic block and
> keep track of
> LHS expressions that are C
On 10/05/16 14:46, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
Hi all,
I'm taking a stab at fixing PR 22141 by merging adjacent stores into wider
stores in a late gimple pass.
My current plan is to go through all the assignments in a basic block and
keep trac
Snapshot gcc-5-20160510 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20160510/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
On 09/05/16 10:18, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 8 May 2016@02:10, Christopher Di Bella wrote:
If not, I'd like to get a start on implementing a warning system for
them. I'll create a branch, but I doubt it'll be ready for gcc 7.1's
release.
Hi, I don't think anyone is working on that yet.
See ht
On Wed, 30 Mar 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 03/25/2016 04:43 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > If Bernd is fine with this, I'm happy to retract my patch and any
> > possible followups. I'm just interested in having no path causing a
> > possible out of bounds access. If your patch will do that, I'
11 matches
Mail list logo
