On 10/18/22 00:26, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 10/17/22 07:28, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> Based on the very positive feedback I was given at the Cauldron Sphinx
>> Documentation BoF,
>> I'm planning migrating the documentation on 9th November. T
On 10/19/22 13:09, Martin Liška wrote:
> There ePUB would be likely better output format. What do you think?
I've just included ePUB books:
https://splichal.eu/scripts/sphinx/#epub
Martin
On 10/19/22 18:42, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>>> Currently, there is a tarball with texinfo sources for all the manuals
>>> for each version.
>>
>> Well, then equivalent would be packaging all .rst files together with th
On 10/19/22 18:30, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 10/19/22 05:09, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 10/18/22 00:26, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>>> On 10/17/22 07:28, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> Based on the very positive feedback I wa
On 10/20/22 04:26, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-10-17 at 15:28 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> Based on the very positive feedback I was given at the Cauldron Sphinx
>> Documentation BoF,
>> I'm planning migrating the documentation on 9th No
On 10/20/22 13:49, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> (CC our team members.)
>
> On Thu, 2022-10-20 at 13:27 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> Ouch. This will be very painful for Linux From Scratch. We'll need to
>>> add 23 Python modules to build the documentation, while we on
On 10/20/22 13:55, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-10-20 at 13:53 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 10/20/22 13:49, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
>>> (CC our team members.)
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2022-10-20 at 13:27 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>>> Ouch. This will
On 10/20/22 17:35, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>>> Could generated man and info pages be provided as a tarball on
>>> gcc.gnu.org or ftp.gnu.org?
>>
>> Not planning doing that.
>
> Release tarballs (but not snaps
Hi.
Tomorrow in the morning (UTC time), I'm going to migrate the documentation
to Sphinx. The final version of the branch can be seen here:
$ git fetch origin refs/users/marxin/heads/sphinx-final
$ git co FETCH_HEAD
URL: https://splichal.eu/gccsphinx-final/
TL;DR;
After the migration, people
On 10/20/22 18:43, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>>> Also, but not strictly part of the release issue:
>>>
>>> (d) Builds with missing or old Sphinx should work regardless of whether
>>> such files are in the source di
On 11/9/22 18:14, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Wed, 9 Nov 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
1) not synchronized content among lib*/Makefile.in and lib*/Makefile.am.
Apparently, I modified the generated Makefile.in file with the rules like:
doc/info/texinfo/libitm.info: $(SPHINX_FILES)
+ if [ x
On 11/10/22 15:45, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Hi, I just observed that links like
https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html
ceased to work. Presumably this is to sphinx stuff, but it would be great if
not hundreds of links across the web to GCC pages like the above would be 404.
I know that th
On 11/10/22 18:01, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Maybe just "docs" or "trunkdocs" or "latestdocs" instead of
> "onlinedocs-new", since that is (1) very long, and (2) will look silly
> in ten years when it's not new and we need to add
> onlinedocs-even-newer 😉
I do support it, it would be probably nicer
On 11/11/22 13:14, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>
>
> Am 11.11.22 um 09:48 schrieb Martin Liška:
>> On 11/10/22 18:01, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> Maybe just "docs" or "trunkdocs" or "latestdocs" instead of
>>> "onlinedocs-new&quo
On 11/11/22 22:10, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 11/11/22 13:52, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> After the migration, people should be able to build (and install) GCC
>>> even if they miss Sphinx (similar happens now if you miss
Hi.
The situation with the Sphinx migration went out of control. The TODO list
overwhelmed me and there are road-blocks that can't be easily fixed with what
Sphinx currently supports. That would require addition of an upstream support
and
a possible new Sphinx release.
Let me summarize the bigge
On 11/14/22 03:49, Martin Liška wrote:
> I'm going to revert the patchset during today (Monday) and I'll send a patch
> with a couple
> of new changes that landed in the period of time we used Sphinx.
The revert is done and I included ce51e8439a491910348a1c5aea43b55f000ba8ac
On 11/14/22 18:21, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
Hello.
> Is it allowed to merge libsanitizer from LLVM in stage 3? If not I'd
> like to cherry pick some commits from LLVM [to fix some stupid errors
> I've made in LoongArch libasan :(].
I'm sorry but I was really busy with the porting of the
On 11/14/22 14:06, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022, Martin Liška wrote:
>> The situation with the Sphinx migration went out of control. The TODO
>> list overwhelmed me and there are road-blocks that can't be easily fixed
>> with what Sphinx currently support
On 11/15/22 11:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 11:02:53AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> Is it allowed to merge libsanitizer from LLVM in stage 3? If not I'd
>>> like to cherry pick some commits from LLVM [to fix some stupid errors
>>
Hi.
I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
ppc64le-linux systems.
Moreover, I run bootstrap on x86_64-linux and checked ABI difference with
abidiff.
Pushed as r13-4068-g3037f11fb86eda.
Cheers,
Martin
On 7/18/22 12:36, Daniel Kiss via Gcc wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are going to add Function Multiversioning [1] support to Arm architectures.
> The specification is made public as beta[2] to ensure toolchain that follows
> Arm
> C Language Extension will implement it in the same way.
>
> A few tweaks
On 11/16/22 10:01, tao.z...@amlogic.com wrote:
> Dear gcc:
>
Hello.
Based on quick discussion with Jakub, we believe fasan-shadow-symbol= would
be a non-trivial amount of work
and we rather suggest doing a per-system build with investigated
-fasan-shadow-offset.
Cheers,
Martin
> I am
On 12/9/22 18:11, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc wrote:
> I expect the compiler to be knowledgeable enough to call whatever is fastest,
> whatever it is, but be consistent in both cases. However, here are the
> results:
Hi.
Note the glibc implementation of mempcpy typically uses (calls) memcpy, thu
On 12/17/22 20:35, Martin Uecker wrote:
Hi all,
what is the process for adding a new UBsan handler?
Hello.
Yes, we sync the run-time library from LLVM project. So a new sanitizer
should go there first.
We have the source in the GCC tree, but I guess this
should go via LLVM?
And the com
On 12/19/22 10:25, Martin Uecker wrote:
Am Montag, dem 19.12.2022 um 09:44 +0100 schrieb Martin Liška:
On 12/17/22 20:35, Martin Uecker wrote:
Hi all,
what is the process for adding a new UBsan handler?
Hello.
Yes, we sync the run-time library from LLVM project. So a new
sanitizer
should
On 12/28/22 06:48, Andrew Pinski via Gcc wrote:
> But distros do provide more recent prebuilt binaries, you could ask
> them to build using PGO (some do already I think).
Yes, I can confirm that the openSUSE gccX pacakges utlize both PGO and LTO
during
the compiler bootstrap. So, you can use:
htt
On 2/16/23 13:26, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The following is not an actual problem for me or GCC/Rust; just for your
> information:
Hello.
Thanks for letting me know.
>
> I've just pushed to GCC devel/rust/master branch
> Git commits cc23831ec66..74913f718b0, which 'hooks/post_receive.p
Hello GCC community.
After spending last decade (including my diploma thesis even more)
of my life working on GCC, I decided to leave the project and try
a different job. I would like to thank all the community members I had
change to interact with, I learned so much and enjoyed the journey!
I'll
On 2/22/23 09:28, Florian Weimer via Gcc wrote:
> * Richard Biener:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:19 AM Florian Weimer via Gcc
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Can we use the COMMON symbol __gnu_lto_slim to detect
>>> -fno-fat-lto-objects on contemporary GNU/Linux (with the LTO linker
>>> plugin)?
>>
>> Yes.
On 2/16/23 20:46, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> I am sad to hear this news and will definitely miss you as coleague
> and co-maintaner. Thank you for all the work on GCC!
Thank you all for the nice words! And especially to Honza, who was my diploma
thesis supervisor and showed me the community.
Actually
On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
> ppc64le-linux systems.
> Moreover, I run bootstrap on x86_64-linux and checked ABI difference with
> abidiff.
Hello.
And I've done the
On 4/26/23 21:23, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 6:52 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>> On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
>>> ppc64le-linu
On 4/26/23 20:31, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Martin Liška:
>
>> On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> I've just pushed libsanitizer update that was tested on x86_64-linux and
>>> ppc64le-linux systems.
>>> Moreover, I
On 4/28/23 11:23, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Martin Liška:
>
>> On 4/26/23 20:31, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * Martin Liška:
>>>
>>>> On 11/15/22 16:47, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've just
Hello,
I've been compiling Chromium with LTO and I noticed that WPA
stream_out forks and do parallel:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg02621.html.
I am unable to fit in 16GB memory: ld uses about 8GB and lto1 about 6GB.
When WPA start to fork, memory consumption increases so th
Hello,
I've been solving undefined symbols related to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/PR57703. In chromium there's a following inline asm:
asm(".type Syscall, @function\n" ...);
intptr_t SandboxSyscall(...)
{
asm volatile("call SyscallAsm");
}
Where call of SandboxSyscall is inlined in couple of fu
The code resides in Chromium project, please see full source code:
https://github.com/scheib/chromium/blob/master/sandbox/linux/seccomp-bpf/syscall.cc
Martin
On 03/24/2014 06:34 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
I've been solving unde
On 03/25/2014 09:50 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hello,
I've been compiling Chromium with LTO and I noticed that WPA
stream_out forks and do parallel:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg02621.html.
I am unable to fit in 16GB memory: ld uses about 8GB and lto1 about
6GB. When WPA start t
Previous patch is wrong, I did a mistake in name ;)
Martin
On 03/27/2014 09:52 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 03/25/2014 09:50 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hello,
I've been compiling Chromium with LTO and I noticed that WPA
stream_out forks and do parallel:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
On 03/27/2014 10:48 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Previous patch is wrong, I did a mistake in name ;)
Martin
On 03/27/2014 09:52 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 03/25/2014 09:50 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hello,
I've been compiling Chromium with LTO and I noticed that WPA
stream_out forks a
On 04/03/2014 03:07 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 04/03/2014 11:41 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 04/02/2014 04:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 03/27/2014 10:48 AM, Martin Liška wrote
On 04/03/2014 10:40 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Firefox:
cgraph.c:869 (cgraph_create_edge_1) 0: 0.0% 0:
0.0% 130358176: 6.9% 0: 0.0%1253444
cgraph.c:510 (cgraph_allocate_node) 0: 0.0% 0:
0.0% 182236800: 9.7% 0: 0.0
On 04/04/2014 05:10 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 04/03/2014 03:07 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 04/03/2014 11:41 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 04/02/2014 04:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On
On 04/07/2014 01:49 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 04/03/2014 10:40 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Firefox:
cgraph.c:869 (cgraph_create_edge_1) 0: 0.0%
0: 0.0% 130358176: 6.9% 0: 0.0%1253444
cgraph.c:510
On 04/07/2014 07:10 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I added new graph for 'xloc.column = 0' hack, just applied this
single patch to trunk.
Link:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0pisUJ80pO1MW11WHdjMk9KQnc/edit?usp=sharing
Good, does these two patches combine together well? (they are rater orthogonal,
601 - 646 of 646 matches
Mail list logo
