ChangeLog's: do we have to?

After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been generated programmatically. Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining arguments for requiring ChangeLog entries? I vaguely recall Jak

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:47 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted > days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been > generated programmatically. > > Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining argu

您的京东2018年12月月度账单 欢迎点击查看

我的东 京东会员 退订投诉   代开正规发票 (电话/微信13265168562张) 温馨提示：由于邮件接收时间可能存在延迟，且统计数据截止至自然月最后一天，最新信息请电话和QQ微信联系。长期有效！ 亲爱的您好：您最新的账单已出，欢迎您查看。 代开发票 （QQ:1808901678微信）   代开发票  正规发票  代开发票  正规发票 广告、建筑  工程、劳务  设备、机械  建

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> They are definitely useful in my day-to-day work when tracking down changes > given I can easily grep them. Seconded. > I think that any change here should be _after_ we've switched to git > (finally). Well, git doesn't make anything easier than subversion in this area so... -- Eric Botcazou

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:13 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > They are definitely useful in my day-to-day work when tracking down changes > > given I can easily grep them. > > Seconded. > > > I think that any change here should be _after_ we've switched to git > > (finally). > > Well, git doesn't mak

Re: About a error reported by gcc

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 02:14, snow_xmas wrote: > > Hello. > The source in the attachment can not be compiled, because there is a > variable in the lambda-introducer does not have a copy-constructor, but have > a move-constructor. When a function object constructed by a lambda-expression > lik

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Jul 05 2018, Richard Biener wrote: > I was told there's git grep which may be used to grep commit logs? To grep commit logs you use git log --grep. git grep searches content. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 at 11:28, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:13 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > > > They are definitely useful in my day-to-day work when tracking down > > > changes > > > given I can easily grep them. > > > > Seconded. > > > > > I think that any change here shou

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On 07/05/2018 04:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:47 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been generated programmatically. Can someone refresh m

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 06:46:11AM -0400, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > However, even if you could "git log --grep" the commit messages, I assume > your current use is grepping for function names and such, right? Being able > to grep a commit message won't solve that problem, or am I missing > something?

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted > days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been > generated programmatically. > > Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining arguments for > requiring ChangeLog entries? I take the

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 1:01 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 06:46:11AM -0400, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > However, even if you could "git log --grep" the commit messages, I assume > > your current use is grepping for function names and such, right? Being able > > to grep a commit

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:13 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: >> >> > They are definitely useful in my day-to-day work when tracking down changes >> > given I can easily grep them. >> >> Seconded. >> >> > I think that any change here should be _after

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 1:48 PM NightStrike wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:13 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> > >> > They are definitely useful in my day-to-day work when tracking down > >> > changes > >> > given I can easily grep th

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 01:01:45PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > We have contrib/mklog that can do something semi-automatically, I guess any > improvements there are welcome. > It works on patches and thus is limited to the info that the patch (usually > with diff -p) provides, I guess if it could

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 7:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 1:48 PM NightStrike wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:28 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:13 PM Eric Botcazou >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> > They are definitely useful in my day-to-day work

Inefficient code

I have a struct that looks like this: struct Xrb { uint16_t xrlen; /* Length of I/O buffer in bytes */ uint16_t xrbc; /* Byte count for transfer */ void * xrloc; /* Pointer to I/O buffer */ uint8_t xrci; /* Channel number times 2

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018, Richard Kenner wrote: > > After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted > > days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been > > generated programmatically. > > > > Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining argu

Re: What is the difference between datatype "const_tree" and "tree" ?

On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 04:58 +, 冠人 王 via gcc wrote: > In the function emit_side_effect_warnings, I find its inputs are > "location_t loc" and "tree expr". > And, there is a function warn_if_unused_value called by > emit_side_effect_warnings: > emit_side_effect_warnings(location_t loc, tree expr)

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> GCC ChangeLogs don't record the purpose of the change. They say what changed, > but not why. That depends on how you define "purpose". Let's take a random entry, from a 1999 change of mine: * expr.c (expand_expr): If ignoring reference operations, just expand the operands.

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

* Aldy Hernandez: > Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining arguments for > requiring ChangeLog entries? ChangeLog entries are part of the review, commit messages are not, so you end up with surprises there. At least that's what happens in glibc.

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

* Richard Kenner: >> GCC ChangeLogs don't record the purpose of the change. They say what changed, >> but not why. > > That depends on how you define "purpose". Let's take a random entry, > from a 1999 change of mine: > > * expr.c (expand_expr): If ignoring reference operations, >

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 10:43 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Aldy Hernandez: > >> Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining arguments for >> requiring ChangeLog entries? > > ChangeLog entries are part of the review, commit messages are not, so > you end up with surprises ther

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On Jul 05 2018, Florian Weimer wrote: > (Of course, this policy is problematic if you *remove* code.) You can still add a comment why you are not doing something. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "An

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 10:44 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Richard Kenner: > >>> GCC ChangeLogs don't record the purpose of the change. They say what >>> changed, >>> but not why. >> >> That depends on how you define "purpose". Let's take a random entry, >> from a 1999 change of mine: >>

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On 07/05/2018 02:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:47 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been generated programmatically. Can someone refresh my m

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> But this is against GNU policy for ChangeLog entries. Explanations of > the change should go into the source code, as comments. No, explanation of the *code* should go into the source code, as comments. The source code is not the place for a history of the form: "In 1999, this code did XYZ, bu

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

* Paul Koning: >> On Jul 5, 2018, at 10:43 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >> * Aldy Hernandez: >> >>> Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining arguments for >>> requiring ChangeLog entries? >> >> ChangeLog entries are part of the review, commit messages are not, so >> you end

Re: Question on -fopt-info-inline

> On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:19 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 07/03/2018 12:28 PM, Qing Zhao wrote: >> > > In order to collect complete information on all the inlining > transformation that GCC applies on a given program, > I searched online, and found that the option -fopt-info-

Re: Inefficient code

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 08:45:30AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > I have a struct that looks like this: > > struct Xrb > { > uint16_t xrlen; /* Length of I/O buffer in bytes */ > uint16_t xrbc;/* Byte count for transfer */ > void * xrloc; /* Pointer to I/

Re: Inefficient code

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 12:01 PM, Segher Boessenkool > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 08:45:30AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: >> I have a struct that looks like this: >> >> struct Xrb >> { >>uint16_t xrlen; /* Length of I/O buffer in bytes */ >>uint16_t xrbc;/* By

interrupting Ada tests

Ada tests don't seem to respond to the INT signal: when I interrupt a parallel make check while the Ada tests are running, other test suites are interrupted as well and go away, but ada tests keep running. Is there some trick to have Ctrl-C have the expected effect on the Ada test suite as well o

Re: decrement_and_branch_until_zero pattern

> On Jun 8, 2018, at 6:16 PM, Jim Wilson wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> Thanks. I saw those sections and interpreted them as support for signal >> processor style fast hardware loops. If they can be adapted for dbra type >> looping, great. I'll give that

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On 7/5/18, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > After 20 years of hacking on GCC I feel like I have literally wasted > days of my life typing out ChangeLog entries that could have easily been > generated programmatically. > > Can someone refresh my memory here, what are the remaining arguments for > requiring

Re: Question on -fopt-info-inline

On 07/05/2018 09:27 AM, Qing Zhao wrote: > >> On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:19 PM, Jeff Law > > wrote: >> >> On 07/03/2018 12:28 PM, Qing Zhao wrote: >>> > >> >> In order to collect complete information on all the inlining >> transformation that GCC applies on a give

Re: interrupting Ada tests

On July 5, 2018 6:37:58 PM GMT+02:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >Ada tests don't seem to respond to the INT signal: when >I interrupt a parallel make check while the Ada tests are >running, other test suites are interrupted as well and go >away, but ada tests keep running. Is there some trick to >have

Re: Invalid program counters and unwinding

On 07/02/2018 06:14 PM, Michael Matz wrote: There is no such language in the psABI, no (at least I haven't found anything; you had me worried for a moment :) ). But there's stronger one: all functions through which unwinding is expected must provide CFI. So, yes, such code isn't strictly confor

Re: interrupting Ada tests

On 5 Jul 2018, at 20:08, Richard Biener wrote: > > On July 5, 2018 6:37:58 PM GMT+02:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >> Ada tests don't seem to respond to the INT signal: when >> I interrupt a parallel make check while the Ada tests are >> running, other test suites are interrupted as well and go >> awa

Re: Run (some?) ELF constructors after applying RELRO protection

On 06/11/2018 08:59 PM, Rich Felker wrote: If the application already has to annotate that the data is going to be read-only after ctors, it can just page-align/page-pad the data itself and call mprotect with minimal additional effort, and no complex interaction between application code and relro

Re: interrupting Ada tests

Hi Simon, > On 5 Jul 2018, at 20:08, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On July 5, 2018 6:37:58 PM GMT+02:00, Martin Sebor wrote: >>> Ada tests don't seem to respond to the INT signal: when >>> I interrupt a parallel make check while the Ada tests are >>> running, other test suites are interrupted as

Re: Inefficient code

> I just constructed another test case that shows the same issue more > blatantly: > > struct s > { > char a; > char b; > char c; > char d; > int e; > int f; > char h; > char i; > }; No, it's not the same issue. > struct s ts; > > void setts(void) > { > ts.a=

Re: Inefficient code

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 4:44 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > ... > The GIMPLE pass responsible for the optimization simply punts for the "funny- > endian ordering" of the PDP11. More generally, you shouldn't expect anything > sparkling for such a peculiar architecture as the PDP11. Ok. Yet anoth

Re: Question on -fopt-info-inline

On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 13:04 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 07/05/2018 09:27 AM, Qing Zhao wrote: > > > > > On Jul 3, 2018, at 7:19 PM, Jeff Law > > > wrote: > > > > > > On 07/03/2018 12:28 PM, Qing Zhao wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to co

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

> "Florian" == Florian Weimer writes: Florian> To some degree, it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem because Florian> “git am” tends to choke on ChangeLog patches (so we can't Florian> really use it today) FWIW, installing a ChangeLog merge driver fixes this. I use git-merge-changelog from

Re: overflow check in extract_range_from_binary_1 useless?

On 06/13/2018 05:18 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 11:42 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: >> >> Howdy. >> >> Am I missing something or are these two sets identical? >> >>> /* Get the lower and upper bounds of the type. */ >>> if (TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS (expr_type)) >>>

gcc-7-20180705 is now available

Snapshot gcc-7-20180705 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/7-20180705/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 7 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-7

Re: Inefficient code

> So back to the previous one: anything I can do about a 24 bit field getting > split into three movqi rather than a movqi plus a movhi? That happens > during RTL expand, I believe. Yes, this one doesn't look as hopeless as the store merging issue. A way of tackling it would be to do a side-by-

-Wclass-memaccess warning should be in -Wextra, not -Wall

Simply because a struct has a constructor does not mean it isn't a viable target/source for use with memcpy/memmove/memset. Having benchmarked the alternatives memcpy/memmove/memset definitely makes a difference in various scenarios. The bypass of littering code with needless reinterpret_cast's i

Re: Inefficient code

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 6:47 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: > >> So back to the previous one: anything I can do about a 24 bit field getting >> split into three movqi rather than a movqi plus a movhi? That happens >> during RTL expand, I believe. > > Yes, this one doesn't look as hopeless as the stor

Re: Inefficient code

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 9:01 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > > >> On Jul 5, 2018, at 6:47 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: >> >>> So back to the previous one: anything I can do about a 24 bit field getting >>> split into three movqi rather than a movqi plus a movhi? That happens >>> during RTL expand, I

Re: ChangeLog's: do we have to?

On 07/05/2018 05:02 PM, Richard Biener wrote: I assumed you just want to remove the ChangeLog files, not change contents. Thus I assumed the commit message would simply contain the ChangeLog entry as we requie it today? In that case git log --grep would still provide everything grepping ChangeLo

Re: Inefficient code

> Xstormy does 3 mov.b also. For that matter, so does the x86 target (both > -m32 and -m64). Hm. Indeed, even at -Os, so this may be a generic issue. -- Eric Botcazou