DJ Delorie writes:
> genrecog uses strings to keep track of where it is, specifically,
> digits and letters. I've got an insn that writes to more than 26
> registers. Would switching to something bigger than [A-Z] be
> difficult? Perhaps using Japanese letters instead of English? ;-)
That so
Adam Nemet writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
>> truncate has a machine independent meaning.
>
> Yes, I guess with your definition below it does. It's interesting though that
> Jim had said the opposite in the excerpts posted by Jeff:
>
> And a later messag
Tomasz Francuz writes:
> Ok, I’ve studied a little bit gcc sources, I’ve found sections
> responsible for generating different register loading instructions,
> and indeed there is no information telling to the compiler how to load
> data
>> From FLASH. This is easy to correct, I suppose. But I h
Dave Korn writes:
> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Kai Henningsen wrote:
>>
>>> Joseph S. Myers schrieb:
If you are interested in following the fine points of breakage of
individual
snapshots or other individual jobs run from cron, you should follow the
gccad
Adam Nemet writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
>> I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think Jim said the opposite. He said
>> that the way truncate works is machine dependent. I said that the
>> output of truncate is machine independent. Since truncate is only
&
DJ Delorie writes:
>> That sounds like an awkward insn.
>
> The opcode swaps two register banks. 32 SETs total.
Perhaps you can cheat by using larger modes. E.g., if it's a 32-bit
machine, using DImode will cut the number of operands in half.
Ian
I recently added the new -Wjump-misses-init warning option. It warns
when a goto or switch jumps into the scope of an initialized variable
without actually initializing the variable. I added the warning to
-Wall because it seems to me to fit the criteria of -Wall: a dubious
code practice which is
Basile STARYNKEVITCH writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> I recently added the new -Wjump-misses-init warning option. It warns
>> when a goto or switch jumps into the scope of an initialized variable
>> without actually initializing the variable. I added the warning t
Ralf Wildenhues writes:
> * Ian Lance Taylor wrote on Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 07:12:50AM CEST:
>> Any opinions on this? Should I take the new warning out of -Wall?
>
> Is the missing of an initialization detected elsewhere, or can it be
> detected elsewhere, maybe only in cases
Jeff Law writes:
> I think (as always) we need to find a balance between throwing
> everything *we* find valuable in -Wall and avoiding all changes to
> accommodate users on the other end of the spectrum. With that in mind
> I'd ask Ian to chime in and say something about the # of warnings we
>
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> I don't think this warning can report anything that -Wuninitialized
> cannot report, so it should go in -Wc++-compat only.
For the record, it can, as in when compiling this case without
optimization. This is not a strong example by any means.
extern void f2 (int *);
int
Larry Evans writes:
> At pt.c:2462
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/cp/pt.c?revision=148666&view=markup
>
> there's:
>
> switch (TREE_CODE (t))
> {
> case TEMPLATE_PARM_INDEX:
> if (TEMPLATE_PARM_PARAMETER_PACK (t))
> parameter_pack_p = true;
> break;
>
> In
I am pleased to report that if you configure gcc with
--enable-build-with-cxx, which causes the core compiler to be built
using a C++ compiler, a bootstrap on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu now
completes.
I would like to encourage people to try using --enable-build-with-cxx in
other configuration--other
Richard Guenther writes:
>> I guess this has to do with reserved word conflict on "new":
>>
>> <<
>> tree
>> substitute_in_type (tree t, tree f, tree r)
>> {
>> tree new;
>>
>> Do you have some way to deal with this?
>
> Use a non-reserved identifier. I guess on trunk Ada doesn't build
> w
Laurent GUERBY writes:
> Wanting to test Ada on the branch, after checkout I did on x86_64-linux:
>
> ../gcc/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,ada --enable-__cxa_atexit
> --disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --with-mpfr=/opt/cfarm/mpfr-2.4.1/
> --with-gmp=/opt/cfarm/gmp-4.2.4/ --prefix=/n/16/gu
Laurent GUERBY writes:
> What is the way forward: fixing in some way the Ada Makefile? Or doing
> search and replace in case of keyword/identifier conflict? If
> search/replace, do AdaCore people have an opinion on the best way
> to proceed to avoid maintenance issues in the various trees? (eg: c
Laurent GUERBY writes:
> Next issue is that gnat1 link fails on many missing symbols:
>
> ada/b_gnat1.o: In function `adainit()':
> ada/b_gnat1.c:287: undefined reference to `system__soft_links___elabb()'
> ada/b_gnat1.c:291: undefined reference to
> `system__secondary_stack___elabb()'
>
> a
Robert Dewar writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> I think the function to change is Gen_Output_File_C in bindgen.adb.
>
> I don't really see any urgency for this change, yes gnatbind has
> the option to generate C, but it is not the normal path, and only
> of use i
samboy writes:
> I have a storage application to which I can record or retrieve files. Its
> multi-process C/C++ compiled
> to run on the SPARC platform. The problem is the maximum file size which can
> be stored is 4GB due to
> the size being internally conveyed using an unsigned integer. I ne
Arnaud Charlet writes:
>> Switching gnatbind to generate Ada if there's nothing against
>> it might be a better solution since stage1 uses the system gnatbind, so
>> a patch to current gnatbind will not help (unless we push it to branches
>> and tell user to install a fairly recent gnatbind first
Matt writes:
>> * Develop some trial patches which require C++, e.g., convert VEC to
>> std::vector.
>
> Do you have any ideas for the easiest starting points? Is there
> anywhere that is decently self-contained, or will if have to be a big
> bang?
Thanks for your interest.
I think the one I m
Richard Guenther writes:
> All that above said - do you expect us to carry both vec.h (for VEC in
> GC memory) and std::vector (for VECs in heap memory) (and vec.h
> for the alloca trick ...)? Or do you think we should try to make the GTY
> machinery C++ aware and annotate the standard library (
Jerry Quinn writes:
> Both 3.1.1 and 3.2.3 fail to bootstrap with the following error:
>
> make[1]: Entering directory `/home/jlquinn/gcc/dev/build/gcc323/gcc'
> gcc -c -DIN_GCC--std=gnu89 -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
> -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wtraditional -pedantic
> -Wno-long-
"daniel.tian" writes:
> I check the MIPS and ARM, both those cc1 files opened in Insight debug tool
> contain the mips.md and arm.md file. It is convenient while break point can
> be set in it.
> My port md file doesn't appear in the insight.
You seem to be asking a question about Insight rather
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Is this really the intended behaviour? Andrew closed the bug as invalid,
> saying that this is what we expect, but the docs seem to suggest that we
> ought to do something like:
>
> ...
> __cyg_profile_func_enter (&main, ...);
> ...
> __cyg_profile_fun
Dobes writes:
> I am working on a port to an architecture with some strict rules. The
> restriction that I am unable to figure out how to enforce is a base register
> that is allowed in the destination operand, but not in a source operand.
> For example, this would be allowed "add 4($1), $8, $9
"Ronald F. Guilmette" writes:
> I'd like to propose a small enhancement for the GNU preprocessor, i.e.
> the addition of a new __MACRO__ pre-defined built-in symbol.
We support the __COUNTER__ macro these days. To get __COUNTER__ to be
expaned as you wish, you have to pass it through another ma
Haitao Zhang writes:
> we recently use GCC 4.3.3 to build userland application use ARM EABI,
> for running on a ARM7TDMI, mmuless platform.
>
> after explicit compile application with -fstack-limit-register=R10,
> there is no binary change with or without this option. Does this option work?
>
> a
Jun Sun writes:
> If you or someone could point out where are the code section is for
> adding this support for those arches, or even better, provide some
> hints for us to search the related svn history, that would be really
> helpful. We might get brave enough to add this code for ARM (probably
Mohamed Shafi writes:
> I just want to know about the feasibility of implementing an
> instruction for a port in gcc 4.4
> The target has 40 bit register where the normal load/store/move
> instructions will be able to access the 32 bits of the register. In
> order to move data into the rest of th
Eli Zaretskii writes:
> Some of the -print-* command-line switches either don't work as
> advertised or their documentation should be made more clear.
>
> All of the examples below are with the following version of GCC:
>
> gcc (GCC) 4.0.3 (Ubuntu 4.0.3-1ubuntu5)
> Copyright (C) 2006 Free
Basile STARYNKEVITCH writes:
>@: $(call write_entries_to_file,$(realpath $(GTFILES)),tmp-gi.list)
>$(SHELL) $(srcdir)/../move-if-change tmp-gi.list gtyp-input.list
>$(STAMP) s-gtyp-input
In general, one should try to avoid changing a user specified relative
path to an absolute path.
Trevor Scroggins writes:
> Hello, all. I'm attempting to port GCC 4.4.0 to a new m68k target. The
> target begins execution in the first byte of the first text section.
> Adding '#define CONSTANT_POOL_BEFORE_FUNCTION 0' in my target's tm.h
> seems like the simplest way to avoid execution of read-
Trevor Scroggins writes:
> What I'd like to do is place all constant and read-only data, which I
> now think means all data affected by CONSTANT_POOL_BEFORE_FUNCTION and
> READONLY_DATA_SECTION_ASM_OP (and others?); however, I'd like local,
> read-only data--strings and whatnot--to stay in .text,
fied.
>
> So, that's not true.
Sorry about that. There was a missing comma in configure.ac. Fixed as
follows (also fixed indentation). Committed as obvious.
Ian
2009-07-06 Ian Lance Taylor
* configure.ac: Add missing comma in AC
Trevor Scroggins writes:
> No, that won't work. The assembler only recognizes .text, .data, and
> .bss and doesn't support .section. Surely there's a simple hook that
> instructs that compiler to print locals after a function instead of
> before it?
No. Why should there be? Even if you fix the
Nicolas COLLIN writes:
> I looked at the part of the documentation about function bodies and I
> wonder something : is there a way to get the function calls from it ?
> Because I'd like to make a call graph which represent function and the
> functions it calls.
gcc builds a call graph. See cgra
Richard Henderson writes:
> A better project for helping debug gcc would be to convert all macros
> that use statement expressions into proper inline functions. Which
> would then be emitted as out-of-line functions by gcc's -fkeep-inlines
> flag, which would yield something that's callable from
DJ Delorie writes:
> The documentation says:
>
> @deftypefn {Target Hook} bool TARGET_CAN_INLINE_P (tree @var{caller}, tree
> @var{callee})
>
> But the code says:
>
> #ifndef TARGET_OPTION_CAN_INLINE_P
> #define TARGET_OPTION_CAN_INLINE_P default_target_option_can_inline_p
> #endif
>
> #define T
Nicolas COLLIN writes:
>> From internal representation. I got the body with DECL_SAVED_TREE
>> and I
> succeed to get the name of functions and methods called from
> CALL_EXPR, using TREE_OPERAND, EXPR_STMT_EXPR, etc... But I can't get
> the object on which is called the method (for example in a
Andrew Stubbs writes:
> The problem insn is created by gen_reload when it is given the
> following rtl as input:
>
> (plus:SI (plus:SI (reg/v/f:SI 4 r4 [orig:192 a ] [192])
> (const_int 2 [0x2]))
> (reg:SI 0 r0 [orig:188 ivtmp.24 ] [188]))
You need to backtrack before that point to s
DJ Delorie writes:
> * targhooks.c (default_target_can_inline_p): Rename from
> default_target_option_can_inline_p.
> * targhooks.h (default_target_can_inline_p): Likewise.
> * target-def.h (TARGET_CAN_INLINE_P): Rename from
> TARGET_OPTION_CAN_INLINE_P.
> * co
Mohamed Shafi writes:
> The GCC 4.4.0 internal says :
> [Macro] CALL_REALLY_USED_REGISTERS
> Like CALL_USED_REGISTERS except this macro doesn’t require that the
> entire set of
> FIXED_REGISTERS be included. (CALL_USED_REGISTERS must be a superset of FIXED_
> REGISTERS). This macro is optional. I
Trevor Scroggins writes:
> While I still think the choice is arbitrary (why the front and not the
> back--and mine's a lay opinion, I know), what's the generally accepted
> method for reorganizing string literals and other constants to appear
> after the function asm rather than before it? Some t
Ralf Wildenhues writes:
> FWIW, I wrote vc-chlog a while ago (ships together with vc-dwim[1]) which
> IMVHO is fairly accurate at creating stub ChangeLog entries if you have
> Exuberant Ctags installed. Without it, updates to the GCC build system
> would have been rather painful.
>
> I would add
Chris Lattner writes:
> The key distinction is that contributing to LLVM does not require
> you to sign a form (which isn't even publicly available) and mail it
> in to a busy and high-latency organization before non-trivial
> patches will be accepted.
For the record (Chris probably knows this),
Jon writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote, On 15/03/10 03:12:
>> Jon writes:
>>
>>> How long is it until back in stage 1 development phase?
>>
>> Reasonably soon, I hope, but there is no specific schedule.
>
> Hi Ian,
> Just wanted to ask if it had been
Martin Guy writes:
> now that stage3 is over I'm thinking of updating the
> MaverickCrunch FPU fixes (currently for 4.3) and merging them but
> would appreciate some guidance.
>
> There are 26 patches in all and I can't expect anyone to understand
> them because they require a good understanding
Joakim Tjernlund writes:
> Noticed that gcc 4.3.4 doesn't optimize "add with carry" properly:
Please file a missed-optimization report according to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/ . Thanks.
Ian
Manuel López-Ibáñez writes:
> Ian, how can I check that there is a copyright assignment in place?
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Papers.html
Jon does have a copyright assignment.
Ian
Mark Mielke writes:
> Wouldn't contributing a patch to be read by the person who will be
> solving the problem, but without transferring of rights, introduce
> risk or liability for the FSF and GCC?
>
> I thought "clean room implementation" implies not seeing how somebody
> else did it first, as
Joakim Tjernlund writes:
> Anyway, I *looked* at the page and it said something about gccbug so I tried
> that, not obvious either but I let me fire off a report an back came
> bug ID 43892
Thanks for filing the report.
Ian
Joakim Tjernlund writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote on 2010/04/25 20:07:03:
>>
>> Joakim Tjernlund writes:
>>
>> > Noticed that gcc 4.3.4 doesn't optimize "add with carry" properly:
>
> BTW, I can see in gcc src:
> (define_insn &q
Mark Mielke writes:
> What are clean room implementations for if not for avoiding copyright
> violation?
Avoiding contract violations such as promises to keep source code
secret. A strict clean room implementation also makes it clear that
no copyright violation could have occurred.
> At my co
Chris Lattner writes:
> w.r.t. "hoarding", I'll point out that (in the context of GCC) being
> able to enforce copyright is pretty useless IMO. While you can
> force someone to release their code, the GPL doesn't force them to
> assign the copyright to the FSF. In practice this means that you
>
Jonathan Corbet writes:
> What you agree to is the developers certificate of origin (DCO), which
> says you have the right to contribute the code to the kernel. No
> copyright assignment takes place. Trust me, I have thousands of lines
> of code in the kernel, and the copyright remains mine.
T
Chris Lattner writes:
> On Apr 26, 2010, at 12:23 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> Again, just for the record. History shows that this is not entirely
>> useless. People at NeXT wrote the Objective C frontend to GCC. They
>> did not intend to release the source c
Mark Mielke writes:
> This presumes that NeXT would not have discovered the value of free
> software and done the right thing eventually anyways. I think anybody
> who truly believes in free software should believe in it for practical
> reasons. It's not just a religion - it's the right way to do
Greg McGary writes:
> I have a port without div or mod machine instructions. I wrote
> divmodsi4 patterns that do the libcall directly, hoping that GCC would
> recognize the opportunity to use a single divmodsi4 to compute both
> quotient and remainder. Alas, GCC calls divmodsi4 twice with the
redriver jiang writes:
> test3.c:27: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
> (insn 52 51 32 0 (parallel [
> (set (reg:HI 16 BASE0)
> (plus:HI (reg:HI 16 BASE0)
> (const_int -2 [0xfffe])))
> (clobber (scratch:QI))
> ]
"Alfred M. Szmidt" writes:
> That is more or less what a potentional contributor gets via email
> when submitting a patch. I don't see how a web form would make things
> different.
True, but I think it would make a significant difference if the web
form could be filled out online without requir
"Bingfeng Mei" writes:
> I have been playing with LTO. I notice that LTO doesn't work when
> object files are achived into static library files and the final
> binary is linked against them, although these object files are compiled
> with -flto and I can see all the lto related sections in .a fil
Aina Niemetz writes:
> i'm one of the students who didn't get accepted this year, unfortunately. This
> doesn't lessen my motivation to get involved, though. Thus i decided to roll
> up
> my sleeves and start to work on my proposed project anyway as i think it'd be
> just perfect for getting fam
Toon Moene writes:
> On 04/28/2010 01:44 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>
>> This year GCC received 10 slots for Google Summer of Code.
>
> [ This is probably documented on the Google site somewhere,
> but I couldn't find it. ]
>
> How is this division in "projects" determined ?
>
> What makes GCC "g
Richard Guenther writes:
> Well, we'd then need to re-architect the symbol merging and
> LTO unit read-in to properly honor linking semantics (drop
> a LTO unit from an archive if it doesn't resolve any unresolved
> symbols). I don't know how easy that will be, but it shouldn't
> be impossible a
Jörg Leis writes:
> would it be possible for GCC to ignore the expression that is not
> chosen by __builtin_choose_expr?
>
> Furthermore, it seems like this built-in function inhibits GCC's
> ability to inline functions. I get an undefined reference when I
> compile without -O2; the function is d
"SHANE MILLER, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN" writes:
> Hi, I compile .c files using both gcc.3.4.6 and gcc-4.3.2 chaining to Sun's
> assembler "Sun Compiler Common 10 Patch 09/04/2007" in both cases:
>
> gcc -O3 -D_SOLARIS -D_SPARC -Wall -Wa,-xarch=v8plus -fexceptions -c ...
> How can I turn pseudo a
yazdanbakhsh writes:
> I'm working on my a gcc compiler for my own written processor with the help
> of SimpleScalar.
> I want to remove "srav/slav" (immediate arithmetic shift) from the
> instruction set. I explore ss.md file but I didn't see any define_ins for
> the mentioned instructions, but
Jay K writes:
> proposed/tested fix:
> #ifdef __vms
> #include
> #endif
>
> or similar.
Use #ifdef HAVE_UNISTD_H instead. There are many examples in
libiberty.
Ian
Jay K writes:
> I'm guessing that every ".o" in libiberty/Makefile.in should be changed to
> $(OBJEXT).
Yes.
Ian
roy rosen writes:
> 1. Is that true that if I try to match in the pattern two insns and in
> my code between these insns there is another insn which does not have
> any dependency connection to the other two, Is that true that the
> peephole would not match in this case? (i.e. the insns to match
yazdanbakhsh writes:
> Please assume I'm working with the MIPS. There is a little difference
> between the MIPS and what I'm actually working on it. How can I remove
> immediate logical shift right/left from the compiler?
> I mean If I want the programmer writes an immediate shift, It is compiled
yazdanbakhsh writes:
> This is the newer version. It works correctly. I just want know is there any
> other way.
Did you read what I wrote earlier?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-05/msg00048.html
Ian
roy rosen writes:
> 2010/5/3, Ian Lance Taylor :
>> roy rosen writes:
>>
>> > 1. Is that true that if I try to match in the pattern two insns and in
>> > my code between these insns there is another insn which does not have
>> > any dependency connecti
Magnus Fromreide writes:
> I recently ended up in a discussion about the -pthread flag at work and
> when looking at the documentation I noticed that it is defined onlt for
> SPARC and RS/6000/PowerPC.
>
> Additionally -fopenmp and -ftree-parallelize-loops say they are only
> supported on targets
u
have specific questions.
Ian
> Ian Lance Taylor-3 wrote:
>>
>> yazdanbakhsh writes:
>>
>>> Please assume I'm working with the MIPS. There is a little difference
>>> between the MIPS and what I'm actually working on it. How can I remove
>>
t; Ian Lance Taylor-3 wrote:
>>
>> yazdanbakhsh writes:
>>
>>> I want to change instruction blez to ble. ble compare two registers and
>>> jump
>>> to the target address if the condition is true.
>>
>> Read the internals manual to unde
yazdanbakhsh writes:
> (define_expand "cbranchsi4"
> [(set (pc)
> (if_then_else: SI (le:SI (match_operand:SI 0 "register_operand" "=d,d")
> (match_operand:SI 1 "register_operand" "=d,d"))
> (label_ref (match_operand 2 "" ""))
> (pc)))]
> ""
> "
Basile Starynkevitch writes:
> Long time ago (probably in the GCC 2.95 & 3.2 time frame) I would
> imagine that the "register" keyword indeed affected register
> allocation, in the sense that variables declared with register where
> indeed & preferentially put in a machine register.
I don't thin
Richard Guenther writes:
> This is a proposal to introduce an optimization level -Ofast
> that can collect (target specific) optimization flags that
> can affect runtime behavior such as -funsafe-math-optimizations
> or -mrecip.
Sounds like a good idea to me. I don't like the name -Ofast, which
Andrew MacLeod writes:
> I've been working for a while on understanding how the new memory
> model and Atomics work, and what the impacts are on GCC.
Thanks for looking at this.
One issue I didn't see clearly was how to actually implement this in
the compiler. For example, speculated stores ar
Andrew MacLeod writes:
> They are independent as far as dependencies within this compilation unit.
> The problem is if thread number 2 is performing
> a.j = val
> b.i = val2
>
> now there are data races on both A and B if we load/store full words
> and the struct was something like: struct {
>
Albert Cohen writes:
> Jean-Marc Bourguet wrote:
>>> -fmemory-model=single
>>> Assume single threaded execution, which also means no signal
>>> handlers.
>>> -fmemory-model=fast
>>> The user is responsible for all synchronization. Accessing
>>> the same me
yazdanbakhsh writes:
> (define_insn "*bltdf"
> [(set (pc)
> (if_then_else (lt:SI (match_operand:DF 1 "" "")
>(match_operand:DF 2 "" ""))
> (match_operand 3 "pc_or_label_operand" "")
> (match_operand 4 "pc_or_label_operand" "")))]
> ""
>
> "*
> {
Jay K writes:
> -disable-libgcc and/or -disable-fixincludes are useful, depending on your
> goal.
>
> Like if you just want to compile C to assembly or object files.
>
>
> It fails, but only after doing what I want anyway.
>
> make[2]: *** No rule to make target
> `../build-sparc-sun-solaris2.
Vivek Verma writes:
> I am trying to speedup the load and startup time of a shared
> library. After reading Ulrich Drepper's paper on "How to write shared
> libraries", it seems that the easiest thing to try would be to reduce
> the number of symbols that are globally visible. After carefully
>
Jay K writes:
> Ok if I do both or the emails are just annoying?
As far as I'm concerned, it's fine to do both.
> I find that bugs are often ignored just as well (but not lost/forgotten,
> granted. :) )
Agreed on both counts.
Ian
Marc Glisse writes:
> On Tue, 11 May 2010, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> And you can use -Wl,-O1 (pass -O1 to the linker) to let the linker
>> determine optimal size of the hash table (minimum number of collisions
>> for reasonably sized section).
>
> Was it considered enabling this automatically wit
Jay K writes:
> Understood, but I'll have to stick to "small" changes as I can't get the
> papers.
Note that for copyright purposes a series of unrelated small changes
counts as a big change. If you truly can't do the paperwork, then
it's probably best for the project if you avoid sending actu
"Paulo J. Matos" writes:
> I have a backend and I would like to have a systematic way to know if
> my testsuite covers all the define_insn and define_expand rules in my
> md file.
>
> What's the best way to achieve this?
For define_insn you can use the -da option, and scan the debug files
for
Eggenmüller Bernd writes:
> is it possible to translate the libgcc2 when i only have 4 registers
> which are 32 bits long.
> One of the four Registers is defined as Basepointer and another as
> Stackpointer.
> The other two can be used to calculate.
libgcc2 is intended to be machine independent.
"Paulo J. Matos" writes:
> How can I say in the machine architecture that to generate code for a
> particular insn I need any two registers for intermediate operations?
> To get one I think that (clobber (match_operand ...)) will work but
> what if I want two? Can I add two clobbers on the same d
IainS writes:
> .. this seems a bit strange : -fPIC is not a ld flag...
LDFLAGS is flags that are passed to the compiler when linking. It is
not flags passed directly to the linker. I don't know why -fPIC is
there, but it shouldn't do any harm.
The Makefile fragment config/mh-ppc-darwin is s
Michael Matz writes:
> On Wed, 12 May 2010, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
>
>> Well, you get the same thing you get today. Any synchronization done
>> via a function call will tend to be correct since we never move shared
>> memory operations across calls. Depending on your application, the
>> types
Eggenmüller Bernd writes:
> Andrew Pinski schrieb:
>> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Eggenmüller Bernd wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any implementation with less registers like this.
>>>
>>
>> libgcc2 is written in C; so if it fails to compile you need to fix up
>> your backend. There might
Michael Matz writes:
> On Mon, 17 May 2010, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> >> Since the atomic operations are being built into the compiler, the
>> >> intent is to eventually optimize and inline them for speed... and in
>> >> the best case, simply resu
"Jon Beniston" writes:
> Is it possible to update the multilib combinations supported by GCC after it
> has been built?
I believe that all the multilib information can be read from the specs
file, so, technically, yes.
> %rename multilib_matches old_multilib_matches
> *multilib_matches:
> mcpu
Joshua Haberman writes:
> I have a case where I think useless stores are being generated, but I
> want to be sure before I file a bug. This is with gcc 4.4.3 on Ubuntu
> 10.04, x86-64.
I concur that this is a missed optimization bug.
Ian
Eggenmüller Bernd writes:
> how can I disallow the mov operation for a register class.
> Can someone help me?
Please do not start a new thread by replying to an existing message.
That hides your message for all of us who use threaded e-mail readers.
If there is some mode which can be stored in
kito writes:
> Hello every body
> I have read the rtl.h & rtl.c,
> but I don't realize the format for insn, call_insn and junp_insn
>
> it's define in rtl.def
>
> DEF_RTL_EXPR(JUMP_INSN, "jump_insn", "iuuBieie0", RTX_INSN)
>
> and it's dump by some real program
>
> (jump_insn 14 /* i */
>
1601 - 1700 of 3176 matches
Mail list logo
