On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:16:23PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2005-10-25 16:01:43 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:53:23PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> > > Yeah, I knew about that one, cutting and pasting from any full screen
> >
itialized variables;
> it would also record (but not warn for) maybe uninitialized variables
> (by detecting default definitions appearing in PHI nodes).
> Thoughts?
I think that sounds very clever...
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ed off if gcc produces new, but bogus, warnings
> for uninitialized variables (please feel free to produce new, but *valid*,
> warnings).
People who use -Wall -Werror are _already_ pissed off about
-Wuninitialized. It virtually guarantees that your build will fail on
a new release of GCC.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 05:53:49PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 08:44:51PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 05:32:51PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 02:13:05AM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> > > &g
to change across releases, and
easier to predict and explain to non-compiler-hackers.
If the option was available, I'd switch GDB over in a heartbeat. Or at
least propose it.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
tag naming conventions. Coincidentally, Paul Brook just posted
a very promising looking one!
There's no real need for this to live in svn itself.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
) -L
> gcc/.cvsignore (.../gcc) (revision 106387) gcc/.svn/empty-file
> gcc/.cvsignore
> /usr/bin/diff: gcc/.cvsignore: No such file or directory
> svn: '/home/afra/users/renneckej/bin/gccdiff' returned 2
Presumably this is a bug in your 'gccdiff' script?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:08:27PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 07:15:22PM +, Joern RENNECKE wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Index: gcc/.cvsignore
> >>==
bility. Use if cascades or indirect
> jumps for the others, if necessary.
The only real problem with this is that it mandates use of shared
libgcc for the routines in question... always. If they ever go into
libgcc.a, we can't make sure we got the right copy.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 07:40:51AM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > The only real problem with this is that it mandates use of shared
> > libgcc for the routines in question... always. If they ever go into
> > libgcc.a, we can't make
s while I was writing this:
- how to make svk refuse commits to the mirrored portion instead of
wanting to push them upstream
- how to make svk access depots remotely
I'm sure they're both possible, I just don't know how yet :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:37:13AM -0800, Devang Patel wrote:
> On 11/7/05, Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I have generated an SVK repository to go with this. As anyone who's
> > doing or done this themselves can attest, it tak
it going to fall down? Refuse to commit entirely?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
/usr/local/svk-1.05/perl/darwin-thread-multi-2level/SVN/Core.pm line
> 579.
> Authorization failed:
> Commit message saved in svk-commitllh82.tmp.
> ---
>
> Isn't this, creating local branches, is a local operation ?
//gcc is a mirrored location. You have to create you
ht it was on by default, and I can't see where that comes
from...
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
default = x
then target_cpu_default=MASK_EXPLICIT_RELOCS
else target_cpu_default="($target_cpu_default)|MASK_EXPLICIT_RELOCS"
fi])
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
o an optional utility, this extra debug info
> should not be emitted by default. There should be an option to emit it.
I'd like to know what the size impact of including basic block
information would be, first; a lot of tools, including GDB, could make
use of it if it were available.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ent basic
block because of some artifact of inlining. This shouldn't present any
problem for a tool using the basic block information.
I'm afraid I don't have any useful comments on the patch, but I would
like to see GCC generate this information.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ery much an internal representation concept that we're exposing.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ry basic block in a function in order to trace
execution a little more efficiently than single stepping.
- Perhaps improve efficiency of checkpoint/restart reverse debugging.
I'm sure there's plenty more :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ases. (This must be
> true when not running with -g, but I thought it was true in other cases
> as well.) It might be true for other tools, too.
It does now, but given the level of complexity associated with
preserving that in your current scheme, it would probably be easier to
fix all the
ode size. I'd expect much
more than 1% saving the write-out and write-in on -g.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
> useful comments there are, the better the chance of us getting a decent
> allocator.
I don't have any useful comments, but I want to thank you for doing
this: it seems like a sound design, and a decent strategy to get GCC
moving in an area where it has been stuck in a ditch for a wh
ests in the linuxthreads testsuite and I've run it on HEAD
recently.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
's, or move on with Andrew's new design to modernize
GCC's.
(B) What bits of GCC would we be bypassing, and how badly would we miss
them?
Presumably, many of the shiny new tree optimizers. Ow. But GCC was
not in any state to do this sort of surgery a year ago, I think.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
question are old enough that they pre-date the fix. I know, for
> example, that FC2 and RHEL3 are affected, but FC4 isn't.
Definitely works on glibc HEAD, then.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
/home/gdr/svk
If you've got this...
> but the command
>
>svk checkout //gcc/trunk gcc
... then you can't use this. Try /gcc/gcc/trunk?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
dea,
although I'm sure a volunteer who cared enough to do so would find it
worthwhile.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ool, rather than
piling it into the compiler and linker proper. This wouldn't be a
mammoth task.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ems. I know my solaris box would benefit and I believe
> others also if the i/o in SVN were switched to use chdir instead.
>
> Please consider it.
For Solaris, I learned recently, the preferred solution to this problem
is actually "openat" and friends.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
) Is it normal that "svk push" takes more than 5 minutes to complete?
>If so, that does not match the speed argument I've seen for the
>move to SVN.
SVN is fast. SVK, in many operations, seems to be quite slow (but fast
on others).
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
echnology and the LLVM proposal is for merging an
existing (already GCC-based) technology to work more closely with GCC.
I'm not actually as biased in favor of LLVM as this message sounds; I
feel that I don't have a good enough understanding of either option.
But I wanted to clarify what I've learned from my earlier conversations
about this topic.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ining C++ to the
optimizers, i.e. preserving the ability to bootstrap without a C++
compiler.
That said, I wish it weren't necessary.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
erwise, that's OK, but I'll probably end up
merging a copy of it into GDB at some point. That really looks like
the only feasible way to handle DFP debugging.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
he'll
> likely just fix the problems very quickly. :)
>
> That's how Daniel Jacobowitz got svk imports of the gcc repo working
> without needing a billion gigabytes of memory AFAIK (clkao bugfixed and
> provided him with an updated SVN::Mirror with some memory leaks fixed).
on-weak symbol
> only to find out there's obviously no such thing).
That's not right. At least glibc's ld.so has not done this by default
in years; only if you export LD_DYNAMIC_WEAK=1. Weak defs are treated
exactly the same as strong defs during dynamic lookup, by default.
--
le benchmark then adding it to "make check"
> probably isn't going to give much useful data.
I think the only _feasible_ way to do this would be with cycle counting
i.e. simulators, and the _usefulness_ of the available simulators for
performance on today's hardware is probably too limited.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
anyone actively working on
> that? (We're not...)
>
> So, I'm afraid we're going to end up going in the other order, unless
> someone steps up to do the libgcc move shortly.
Well, I've been talking about doing this for so long that I feel I must
take this as a challenge... I will give it a shot.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
down smaller, which
> is likely to be helpful to the folk that actually need it.
Before we actually do replace fp-bit, if this is the primary
differentiator between the two, I'd like to see numbers. I'd rather
have rounding/exception support available if the performance and size
cost is acceptable.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ly the fixes for the Ada problems).
Yes, I'm going to depend on --enable-bootstrap for this. And continue
using files from the GCC directory; we can wean our way out of that
incrementally.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
tion did not
> seem to have this option in it -- at least not in the section dealing
> with command line options
> for the CPP.
>
> Any ideas where it might have gone? Is it an "internal" option?
It is only supported by Apple's compiler, not part of the FSF
make unstage".
stage/unstage should be harmless between builds and a new invocation of
make should generally force the correct state, so it's safe to adjust
them as necessary.
> 2005-12-15 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Makefile.tpl (all, do-[+make
level - hopefully along
with the gcc-provided include files - then gcc can be a pure host
directory, and we won't need to worry about this.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
free is free?
>
> If gmane is free, please supply me a set of the source code to the gmane
> application, so that I can modify it and use it for my own purposes.
http://gmane.org/dist.php
The bits I checked were under the GPL.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
would get (gcc-4_1-branch revision 108596 modified) or
> (gcc-4_1-branch revision 108596 clean)
I think we already had this discussion and decided that svn status took
too long in many cases.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
Exactly what I was suggesting - we can run stage1/gcc, though, which
will make it real obvious in the logs which stage we're building.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
oplevel* directory, "make all-stage1". I
> can rename it to "make restage1" if people care enough, but I think the
> new name fits more the toplevel Makefile's naming of targets (where you
> have all-host, all-target, etc.).
What we really need is more documentation in the top-level Makefile
about the available targets and what they do, I think.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
TAGE1_FLAGS_TO_PASS for the recursive
invocation (in which case, this probably applies to all the other
targets, too).
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
s online again.
Before you go ahead with that, please check with overseers@; they
(Frank in particular) have been setting up a new search engine for the
list archives all last week.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
is letting target libraries be bootstrapped instead of
the huge amount of cruft we have inside the gcc directory to handle
libgcc.
They've continued working for "decades" because up until now, no one's
been brave enough to try to rework them :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
sions of bootstrapping.
We're investigating losing the configure option. But if you insist
that you must continue to run 'make' in the gcc subdirectory, you won't
get a bootstrap, just a rebuild of the current stage.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
platforms; try it and see
:-) My guess is that you're using a shell that does not set the
environment variable 'PWD', or sets it to a canonicalized path; see
libiberty/getpwd.c.
I've been considering disabling ln -s support. It's too fragile,
though this is the first report of it actually failing I've seen by
email; someone mentioned similar problems on IRC.
Paolo, what do you think?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
ould have to recurse to the parent directory, which is then
going to rename your current directory and do bits elsewhere, in other
directories; it's likely to leave you far away from the results of your
make. Do you really think that'll leave you any less confused? I'd be
baffled! I hate it when things rename my $PWD.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
r directory renames (and it looks like we'll have to switch
back to only via directory renames) one of these is obj/gcc and another
is obj/prev-gcc at any given time.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
t decision, and move all the files around instead.
That wouldn't change the need to hand off to the top level in order to
do bootstraps though; the routines in gcc would be just for
convenience. A bootstrap would need to build top level versions of
helper tools and libraries.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
t I think it would be smarter
to avoid the dependence; POSIX is pretty clear on the allowed
canonicalizations of $PWD, but the definition is twisty enough that I'm
sure some shells get it wrong.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
x27;t
fail. The path that matters is not one ever returned by PWDCMD but the
one seen in $PWD by GCC; the only cd that's happened at that point is
done in the shell, by the toplevel Makefile, into 'gcc'.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 03:52:23PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> So, the AIX makefile fragments config/mh-ppc-aix and config/mt-ppc-aix
> could not just do
>
> ADAFLAGS += -mminimal-toc
> ADAFLAGS_FOR_TARGET += -mminimal-toc
We can't use += in the top level, can we?
-
> /tmp//ccgioejq.s: line 538: 1252-149 Instruction lwarx is not implemented in
> the current assembly mode COM.
Again, this error is coming from the AIX assembler, not from GCC. You
ned to pass the correct options (I don't know what they are) to that
assembler to make it accept these instructions.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
is last changed around 2005-06-16 on HEAD, and we
assume that the assembler installed in $prefix is the assembler you
want the compiler to be using - it's the same assembler you'd get if
you said "as", so why shouldn't we use it?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
you'd get if
> >you said "as", so why shouldn't we use it?
> >
> When building from a combined tree, I still see that the compiler is
> using the assembler in $prefix/$target/bin/as even for a native
> configuration.
Sure - after it's installed, I&#x
using --program-prefix would probably also pass the same value
to --with-build-tools.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 01:19:14PM +0100, Gunther Nikl wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 11:39:20AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 05:34:14PM +0100, Gunther Nikl wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > The new scheme to select target tools
s without touching --prefix, in fact, via DESTDIR and
relocatable installs. It's just a bit disruptive to the workflow, so I
wanted to wait until toplevel bootstrap was settled first.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 10:39:06PM +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 16:01 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 09:26:11PM +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 20:47 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > > > &g
ight year on every file. Details in
maintain.texi.
(No, I don't really understand the reasoning. Feel free to follow up
on gnu-prog-discuss if you are on that list.)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ain/gcc-4.2-20060107/host-i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc"
> option, does it generate the executable without any errors. How
> can this include give ld the wrong emulation mode? Apparently,
> there is no "-o" in any file in the build-directory.
Sounds like there's an error in your specs. Run gcc -v and see what
it's invoking.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
e I was building from a clean svn pull
> of the gcc 4.1 branch using svn 1.3.0. Is svn that broken that I need
> to manually correct the timestamps after every pull?
That this ever worked with CVS required a lot of luck.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
he record, this is non-hypothetical. It happened to me a few
weeks ago - if I'd been bootstrapping in a combined tree, stage1 gcc
would have miscompiled stage2 as which would have misassembled stage2
gcc.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ibgcc and the crt startup files, which currently
do live in the gcc directory, and folks have wanted to move out of it
for five or ten years. We can't skip them during a bootstrap; it just
won't work.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
s from time to time, though. We're
listening to yours; please stop blowing off mine.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
part of a bootstrap or not.
I'm not going to respond to the rest. We're going around in circles
and not making the slightest forward progress.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
g two or three
passes before, but not been detected until now - e.g. a needed
definition being deleted.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
s I strongly disagree with this
sentiment. Host dependencies of any sort are a bug.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Someone's informed Richard Stallman that this (annoying) warning will not be
enabled by default in GCC 4.1. But, it currently seems to be. Should it be
turned off before the release? If not, who told RMS it was? :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ou. Perhaps Mike can
clarify if that's what he meant.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
want to stop in, with system
> headers being just one of the boxes.
Right - my point was only that I've thought about it long enough to
know it needed some more thinking about :-)
I definitely agree that the debugger should be doing it, not the
compiler. It's not appreciably ha
we still need 4.3?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Ken Werner wrote:
> On 08/25/2011 02:26 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>> Throwing an exception through a segfault handler doesn't always work
>> on ARM: the attached example fails on current gcc trunk.
>>
>> panda-9:~ $ g++ segv.cc -fnon-call-exceptions -g
>> panda-9
sfully pick up files from another
directory?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
d out where to look for a functional version of the gcc
> cross compiler for this cpu.
If you can't build GCC for your target, I suggest you either use a
help list for that purpose (gcc-help or the crosstool or buildroot
lists), or find a pre-compiled ARM Linux toolchain.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
" links at the above
> URLs) these appear to have genuinely originated at rt.gnu.org via the web
> interface:
Isn't this more likely the RT admins closing spam reports?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 04:29:29PM +0200, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> I suppose LTO plugins means plugin dlopen-ed in lto-plugin/lto-symtab.c
It sounds to me like this confusion comes from "LTO plugins". Isn't
it just "LTO plugin"? That is, a specific pl
eally aimed at compiler developers. I think we would
benefit from more "what is the compiler doing to my code" options
(producing "note:"); things like which functions were inlined, which
loops unrolled. We do already have this for vectorization.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
o put them into a separate
> file so the linker won't produce undefined references when they are not
> actually used by lto1.
Yes. Take a look at config/arm/arm-c.c, which does not go into
libbackend.a.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
nostics are only of
> limited use without (say) #pragma unroll.
Not too limited, I'd say. I've seen a lot of developers willing to
mutilate their critical loops to accomodate the compiler.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
other
> functions are not considered to be called once, perhaps a visibility
> issue. We also should say what limit was reached on inlining hlprog.
Maybe because of whatever did that cloning?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
his?
>
> The color that spells -fuse-linker-plugin seems better, in line
> with other options. How it's implemented, especially regarding
> having to ignore it in middle-end is unimportant wrt. spelling,
> IMVHO.
I agree with H-P.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ling for other vector sizes.
> >3) Switch to the new mangling
>
> I vote for 2.
Does anyone know of another relevant compiler? What does it do?
For instance, if someone can hand me a test case, I could check how
ARM's compilers mangle it (or don't).
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 08:31:27PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> And patch doesn't have an option to ignore whitespace changes.
Sure it does. -l (for loose, or --ignore-whitespace).
QUILT_PATCH_OPTS for quilt.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
ntation caller and __aeabi_read_tp() must run in
> the same mode.
I don't believe that this is true. In what way is it not safe?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
blems. Do you have a concrete problem?
> Is the implementation still incomplete?
No. It's been finished for two years or more.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
esn't. You may have heard of a commercial testsuite built on this
principle :-)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
tion
>
> However, the solution seems to work, except in O0, where I get this error:
This means whatever is calling gen_newrtl to create the insn is not
checking operand predicates first. That's probably code you wrote
too.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
at and how do I handle the cost then ?
>- Just say that an unspec has a higher cost?
Are you really talking about rtx_costs? It sounds to me more like you
want to change your scheduler.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
se EPILOGUE_USES to say that changes to the
accumulator should not be discarded. You could also use
unspec_volatile instead of unspec, but that may further inhibit
optimization.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
For the sake of conversation I'll call them Alice and
Bob... no, I'll call them TARGET_MAVERICK and TARGET_NEON. Now you
need a minimum of three copies of the mov pattern that are
mostly the same.
It'd be nice if there was a way to compose instruction patterns :-(
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
h weird operand predicates. For instance,
in a patch I'm working on for ARM cmpdi patterns, I ended up needing
"cmpdi_lhs_operand" and "cmpdi_rhs_operand" predicates because Cirrus
and VFP targets accept different constants. Automatically generating
that would be a bit excessive though.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
the 64-bit insns
> it still fails the openssl testsuite.
Interesting, I knew you had a lot of Cirrus patches but I didn't
realize the state of the checked-in code was so bad.
Is what's there useful or actively harmful?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
of host systems where shell scripts aren't a viable
option for ld. Why make everyone write the wrapper script? Makes
sense to me to have gcc decide.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
201 - 300 of 627 matches
Mail list logo
