[CC gcc list and Sandra]
Thanks for the suggestions. I agree that the documentation
should make it possible to answer at least the basic questions
on your list. We'll see about incorporating them.
In general, attributes that affect optimization are implemented
at a level where higher-level dis
I am Siddhartha Sen,currently pursuing my B.Tech degree in Information
Science and Engineering,2nd year. I have taken a keen interest in your
projects and have some ideas of my own as well. I am really interested in
working with you in G-SOC 2019. I am proficient in C and C++ and am eager
to work o
On 11/21/18 1:48 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/20/2018 12:54 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 11/20/18 4:24 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>> On 11/20/2018 03:10 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 11/15/18 5:54 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/15/2018 03:12 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>>
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Martin Liška wrote:
> One related question: Is it fine to use apostrophes in
> dg-error/dg-warning patterns.
In general the testsuite sets LC_ALL to C (and to C.ASCII on platforms
where C means C.UTF-8), so yes.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
I want to use define_subst like this:
(define_subst "vec_merge_with_vcc"
[(set (match_operand 0)
(match_operand 1))
(set (match_operand 2)
(match_operand 3))]
""
[(parallel
[(set (match_dup 0)
(vec_merge
(match_dup 1)
(match_opera
Hi!
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 08:41:24AM +0700, Arseny Solokha wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 06:15:47PM +0700, Arseny Solokha wrote:
> >> I've found recently that rs6000 and powerpcspe backends can easily trip
> >> over
> >> various gcc_unreachable()'s and gcc_assert()'s in their respective co
On 11/26/18 3:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/23/18 12:31 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
GCC currently accepts the declaration of f0 below but ignores
the attribute. On aarch64 (and I presume on other targets with
a default function alignment greater than 1), GCC rejects f1
with an error, even though it
On 11/27/18 11:57 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 11/26/18 3:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/23/18 12:31 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
GCC currently accepts the declaration of f0 below but ignores
the attribute. On aarch64 (and I presume on other targets with
a default function alignment greater than 1), GC
Usecase : The usecase is to get a high-level assessment of the quality of
function profiles available (-Wcoverage-mismatch and -Wmissing-profile are
useful in the same spirit). For large codebases, it is useful to make the
profile quality information more handy for ease of development. Doing a ful
>
> Regarding the function level detail being too noisy : I sort of agree with
> that
> comment. But I am of the opinion that I would rather leave it to the user to
> infer the profile quality as per the application characteristics.
Makes sense I guess. But I would keep the drill down as opt-
10 matches
Mail list logo
