On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Adam wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When using -flto is there a way to tell gcc to not inline a particular
> function? attribute noinline appears to have no effect. I am using gcc 4.7.2.
> The use case is for certain functions that cause optimization problems when
> they are
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 05:06:46PM +0100, Richard Günther wrote:
>> Jack Howarth wrote:
>>
>> >Tobi,
>> >Can you update the isl and cloog tarballs in the gcc infrastructure
>> >directory
>> >to the new isl 0.11.1 and cloog 0.18.0 releases fro
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
It would be nice to finally move
the call to cgrap
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 03:23:06PM +0530, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
>> Greetings!
>>
>> I would like to know if there are any TODO tasks that I can work on to
>> get started with Graphite/GCC. I came across Tobias Grosser's post
>> regarding Graphi
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David Taylor wrote:
> What is the status of STABS support?
>
> I know that there is considerably more activity around DWARF than STABS.
> It appears that STABS is largely in maintenance mode. Are there any
> plans to deprecate STABS support? If STABS enhancements
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 4:00 AM, pps . wrote:
> Question: How can I allocate random amount of stack space (using char
> arrays or alloca, and then align pointer to that stack space and
> reinterpret this chunk of memory as some structure that has some well
> defined layout that guarantees alignment
On Mon, 7 Jan 2013, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Consider this test case:
>
> -- 8<
> int a;
> __attribute__((__noinline__,__noclone__,__pure__))
> int use (int b)
> {
> return b * 2 + 4 + a;
> }
>
> int foo (int b, int c, int d)
> {
> int res, r
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> For attached preprocessed file, dump file
> lib_a-s_frexp.E.021t.copyrename1 contains gimple sequences like:
>
> :
> x_41 = x_8(D);
> goto ;
>
> :
> if (ix_15 <= 1048575)
> goto ;
> else
> goto ;
>
> :
> x_19 = x_8(D)
Status
==
Stage3 has now officially ended after lasting a bit more than two months.
This means that GCC trunk is now in release branch mode, thus only
regression fixes and documentation changes are allowed now.
Upcoming GCC 4.8 has stabilized itself over the holidays and I am
aware of whole-
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 05:12:06PM +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
>>
>> >gcc currently does not even optimize following fragment:
>> >
>> >int foo(){
>> > char *x=malloc(64);
>> > free(x);
>> >}
>>
>> Yes i
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 9:43 AM, thorsten wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>> trying to compile bash-4.2 with the gcc-4.8-20130106 snapshot I get the
>> following error:
>>
>> gcc -DPROGRAM='"bash"' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='"i686"'
>> -DCONF_OSTYPE='"linux-gnu"' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='"i686-pc-linux-gnu"'
>> -DCONF_VEND
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Tobi,
> Can you update the isl and cloog tarballs in the gcc infrastructure
> directory
> to the new isl 0.11.1 and cloog 0.18.0 releases from...
>
> ftp://ftp.linux.student.kuleuven.be/pub/people/skimo/isl//isl-0.11.1.tar.bz2
> http://ww
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Joseph S. Myers
wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013, Michael Zolotukhin wrote:
>
>> > Personally I'd think a natural starting point on the compiler side would
>> > be to write a reasonably thorough and systematic testsuite for such
>> > issues. That would cover all opera
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When running the example attached, you can see the compiler fails to
> recognize not-a-number's properly.
>
> Anyone who would like to have a look?
THat's how FP works. Use isnan().
Richard.
> Regards,
> Mischa.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Uday P. Khedker wrote:
> I was trying to understand the exact meaning of a loose statement
> floating around ("gcc has moved to C++ from version 4.7 onwards).
>
> I reckon from http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/gcc-in-cxx that now gcc is
> compiled using C++. However, the ve
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Mischa Baars wrote:
> On 01/16/2013 01:28 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
>>
>> On 1/16/2013 7:10 AM, Mischa Baars wrote:
>>
>>> And as I have said before: if you are satisfied with the answer '2',
>>> then so be it and you keep the compiler the way it is, personally I'm a
Mike Stump wrote:
>Someone removed isl-0.10.tar.bz2 and cloog-0.17.0.tar.gz from
>ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/infrastructure. I'd hoping this was in error
>and the files can be restored. If there is some compelling reason, I
>am interested.
I removed them in favor of the now documented as recomm
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Wei Mi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For x86, shift insn will automatically mask the count to 5 bits in 32
> bit mode and to 6 bits in 64 bit mode, so for the testcase below, the
> buf_ << (-end & 63) could be optimized to buf_ << -end. But for trunk
> compiler, some place in t
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Hi, suppose the following C code:
>
>
> static __inline__ __attribute__((__always_inline__))
> _Fract rbits (const int i)
> {
> _Fract f;
> __builtin_memcpy (&f, &i, sizeof (_Fract));
> return f;
> }
>
> _Fract func (void)
> {
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> --- On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Tobias Grosser wrote:
> | 1) Use isl code generation
> |
> | isl 0.18 provides a new code generation.
> \--
>
> Where can I find isl 0.18 sources?
It's ISL 0.11.1 actually. 0.18.0 is the curren
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>>> Hi, suppose the following C code:
>>>
>>>
>>> static __inline__ __attribute__((__always_inline__))
>&g
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> --- On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
> | It's ISL 0.11.1 actually. 0.18.0 is the current CLooG version.
> \--
>
> Thanks. I downloaded cloog-0.18.0, compiled and installed the
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Konstantin Vladimirov
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Faced this problem in private backend, but it can be easily reproduced
> on x86 GCC:
>
> Sample code (test.c):
>
> int a;
>
> int foo(int *x, int y)
> {
> a = x[(y << 1)];
> x[(y << 1)] = y;
> return 0;
> }
>
> Compile w
Uday Khedker wrote:
>
>
>
>On Tuesday 22 January 2013 10:27 PM, Richard Kenner wrote:
>>> Perhaps it'd be worthwhile to consider making the compiler easier to
>>> understand, maybe by devoting a lot of effort into the internals
>>> documentation. There's a lot of knowledge wrapped up in people t
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Chassin wrote:
> Hi ,i am developing a simple plugin that allows me to delete a node from the
> cgraph that match a specific pattern but when i delete the node using
> cgraph_remove_node , it seams to delete it ( by printing the cgraph again it
> doesn't appear ) ,
Uday Khedker wrote:
>
>I have been trying to do my stuff for a few years. We conduct a
>programme called "Essential Abstractions in GCC" which is aimed at
>taking a novice to a level from where she can do independent
>experimentation with GCC internals.
>
>I put together a bunch of teaching assis
Please keep this on the list.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Chassin wrote:
> On 01/23/2013 10:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> The callgraph isn't the main data structure to modify here. You probably
> still
> have references to the function in the IL via calls for exam
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Alec Teal wrote:
> On 23/01/13 19:16, Uday Khedker wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday 24 January 2013 12:39 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Uday Khedker
>>> wrote:
>>>
I would like to take this training program to the next
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> [ We have drifted way off the original subject. ]
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Uday Khedker wrote:
>
>> Yes, absolutely. And GCC community should consider it important to bring in
>> newcomers particularly young students and experi
arifies my answer - if not, can you re-phrase your question again?
Thanks,
Richard.
> Uday.
>
> On Friday 12 October 2012 03:25 PM, Uday P. Khedker wrote:
>>
>> Excellent! Thanks.
>>
>> Uday.
>>
>> Richard Biener wrote, On Friday 12 October 2012 0
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Sudakshina Das
wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am currently updating a pass that was made for gcc-4.6.*, so that it
> works for gcc.4.7.2.
>
> In the pass for gcc-4.6.*, a code fragment from tree-ssa-structalias.c
> was picked up and used.
> Given below is the fragment ta
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Uday P. Khedker wrote:
>
>
> Richard Biener wrote, On Thursday 24 January 2013 01:57 AM:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Uday Khedker wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> I am trying to understand the
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Uday Khedker wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday 24 January 2013 12:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> Uday Khedker wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have been trying to do my stuff for a few years. We conduct a
>>> programme ca
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Uday P. Khedker wrote:
>
>
> Richard Biener wrote, On Thursday 24 January 2013 05:28 PM:
>
>
>>> In the program below, we have a global pointer p that has conditional
>>> assignments before its
>&
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Chassin wrote:
> On 01/24/2013 06:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Chassin
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/23/2013 02:37 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Please k
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Sudakshina Das
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Sudakshina Das
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Sudakshina Das
>> > w
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Sudakshina Das
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Sudakshina Das
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Sudakshina Das
>>> wrote:
>>>&g
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Paulo Matos wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there any technical reason (besides nobody bothers to implement it) why
> GCC doesn't support multistep conversions for widen mult?
No.
> In tree-vect-stmts.c:
> /* Check if it's a multi-step conversion that can be done using
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Kenny Simpson
wrote:
> There have been quite a few fixes on the 4.7 branch since 4.7.2 was released
> 4 months ago and several of the remaining regression bugs have fixes in trunk.
>
> What are the plans for 4.7.3?
There will be a 4.7.3 release (shortly) before 4
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Chassin wrote:
> Hi again , this time i am trying to clone a function then insert it with new
> name
>
> sample code
>
> struct cgraph_node *old_node = util_get_cgnode_by_name((char *)user_data);
> struct cgraph_node *new_node ;
>
> tree old_decl = old_node->d
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/30/2013 02:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>> I'm looking at Section 3.2.3, Parameter Passing.
>>> http://artfiles.org/kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/binutils/hjl/x86-64-psabi.git/
>>>
>>> I
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 01/30/2013 03:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 01/30/2013 02:18 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 3
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a routine that creates a local array containing pointers to
> global data. At runtime, when this array is passed to a function, I
> do not see the pointers to the global objects. The GIMPLE does show
> that the array is declared
function as
> extern.
>
> I don't know what else to do!!
You have to compile the plugin with a C++ compiler, as GCC 4.7 is now
built as a C++ program.
Richard.
> Sudakshina
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:16 AM, Sudakshina Das
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Zhiming Wang wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> When reading through http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html configuration
> options, I spotted an inconsistency regarding Graphite loop optimization:
>
> "
> --with-ppl=pathname
> --with-ppl-include=pathname
> --with-ppl-lib=p
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Considering below program,
>
> extern int d;
>
> int func(void)
> {
> int a, b, c;
> a = 2;
> c = 5;
> do
> {
> b = a + 1;
> d = a + c;
> a = b;
> c = d;
> } while (a < 100);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
>
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Kartik Singhal wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am an undergraduate CS student and a beginner to GCC development. I
> am trying to implement a new algorithm for Global Value Numbering
> proposed recently in our research group.
>
> I have basic experience in implementing simple opt
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> I've add pages comparing LLVM-3.2 and coming GCC 4.8 on
> http://vmakarov.fedorapeople.org/spec/.
>
> The pages are accessible by links named GCC-LLVM comparison, 2013, x86 and
> x86-64 SPEC2000 under link named 2013. You can find these lin
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:28 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Also note that for SPEC -funroll-loops helps GCC (yes ... we don't
>>>
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Matt Davis wrote:
> I have a GIMPLE_CALL statement and I want to mark the left-hand-side
> value as being addressable (mark_addressable()). I am trying to force
> the result to be stored on the stack, and not in a register. I know
> the return of a call on an 64bi
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
> Hi Kartik,
>
>
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 15:41:17 +0530, Kartik Singhal
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Richard for pointing out tree-ssa-sccvn.c
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Richard Biener
>>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Paulo Matos wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just noticed when moving port from 4.7.2 to HEAD that genattrtab gets into
> an infinite loop with:
> (define_insn "br_pred"
> [(set (pc)
> (if_then_else
> (match_operator 2 "easy_comparison"
> [(matc
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Paulo Matos wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 11 February 2013 10:56
>> To: Paulo Matos
>> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: genattrtab regression: infi
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Joel Sherrill skribis:
>
>> But it still doesn't address the situation where you have multiple
>> cross compilers in your PATH all for different targets.
>
> Yeah, I thought about it, but couldn’t come up with a practical use case
> where
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Joel Sherrill skribis:
>>
>>> But it still doesn't address the situation where you have multiple
>>> cross compilers in your PATH all for di
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 11:31 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller
> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 00:33:05 -0500 (EST)
>
>> From: Richard Sandiford
>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:14:53 +
>>
>>> ...given that the code is like you say written:
>>>
>>> if (SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED)
>>> {
>>>
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Alec Teal wrote:
> I've been studying/reading gccs code, watching it compile though a debugger
> and reading. Today I noticed something odd in the c++ parser's file. I saw
> what appeared to be a template in a .c file.
It's just a filename ... we compile it with
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hi,
> Could anybody pls advise, if I can detect that given RTL `call` is
> actually a setjmp ()?
Get at the function-decl and use special_function_p (decl, 0) &
ECF_RETURNS_TWICE
(that will conservatively detect all possible setjmp calls but
I'm trying to make IL verifying more streamlined - it's often
that passes have some random (or no) verification in their TODO
which makes pinning down issues to specific passes hard.
Thus I propose to unify the various TODO_verify_* flags into
a single one, TODO_verify_il, and based on what IL pr
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 01:37:28PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > I'm trying to make IL verifying more streamlined - it's often
> > that passes have some random (or no) verification in their TODO
&
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Function get_address_cost in ivopt computes multiplied address cost
> with below code:
>
> First:
> rat = 1;
> for (i = 2; i <= MAX_RATIO; i++)
> if (multiplier_allowed_in_address_p (i, mem_mode, as))
> {
> rat
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
> 2013/2/25 Jeffrey Walton :
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I read the relase notes on GCC 4.8
>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/changes.html) and -Og caught my eye (the
>> bulleted item is below).
> [deleted]
>>
>> What "n" does -Og correspond to for -O and -g
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Function get_address_cost in ivopt computes multiplied address cost
>>> with b
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:04 PM, koala01 wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to compile the gcc-4.8.0-20130217 snapshot with (eg) the last
> version of isl.
>
> This version has a bug fix which make that isl_version() returns
> "isl-1.11.1", as result that configure script fails to detect isl because it
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Dinar Temirbulatov
wrote:
> Hi,
> The current implementation of IPACP doesn't allowed to clone function
> if caller(s) to that function is located in another object. Of course,
> no such problems if we could utilized LTO. And it is very interesting
> to have such fu
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I am not a fan of the new definition of a regression. Yes the new
> definition helps out release managers but it does not help out our
> users at all. In fact I think it hurts them more as some don't update
> as fast as the release managers think they d
On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 5:31 PM Erick Ochoa
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to find out the arguments of functions which are undefined
> during LTO.
>
> Basically:
>
> gcc_assert(in_lto_p && !cnode->definition)
> // Do we have arguments?
> gcc_assert(DECL_ARGUMENTS(cnode->decl)) // fails
> // No
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:32 PM Tamar Christina
wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Gcc On Behalf Of Richard Biener
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 11:12 AM
> > To: Kewen.Lin
> > Cc: GCC Development ; Segher Boessenkool
> >
> > S
On March 14, 2020 10:55:09 AM GMT+01:00, "FRÉDÉRIC RECOULES"
wrote:
>Hello the GCC community,
>I just want to share some thoughts on inlining a function even if
>it is called through a function pointer.
>My starting point is the version 9.2 (used at https://godbolt.org/),
>so I am sorry if someth
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 3:33 PM Aditya K via Gcc wrote:
>
> As I understand the openmp outliner is also at the tree level. A region based
> outliner could be reused there. I’m not particular about the outliner being
> specific to ipa-split. A GSoC project can help us get the coding+testing
> do
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 2:28 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Tom Tromey:
>
> > Also, gerrit was pretty bad about threading messages, so it became quite
> > hard to follow progress in email (but following all patches in the web
> > interface is very difficult, a problem shared by all these web UIs).
On March 24, 2020 5:45:05 PM GMT+01:00, Roger Martz via Gcc
wrote:
>I was glad to see that compiler flags such as -fopt-info-vec-missed ...
>provide information about what is happening under the hood w.r.t code
>that
>can and can't be vectorized.
>
>Can anyone point me to a document, etc. that wo
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 12:01 PM lizekun (A) wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have a question on function "get_symbol_initial_value" in lto-stream-out.c.
>
> When the initial value of symbol is constructor, it will be replaced by an
> error_mark.
> What's the benefit of donging this? In some cases, it increase
chard.
> Best regards!
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Richard Biener [mailto:richard.guent...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 2020年3月26日 20:27
> > To: lizekun (A)
> > Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: Question on lto-stream-out
> >
> > On Thu,
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 4:19 AM xiezhiheng wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I find there exists some restricts in function fwprop preventing it to
> forward propagate addresses into loops.
> /* Go through all the uses. df_uses_create will create new ones at the
>end, and we'll go through them as well.
>
>
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 1:54 PM Erick Ochoa
wrote:
>
> Hello Micheal,
>
> Thanks for this lead! It is almost exactly what I need. I do have one
> more question about this. It seems that the types obtained via
> FOR_EACH_FUNCTION_ARGS and TREE_TYPE are different pointers when
> compiled with -flto.
On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:41 PM Erick Ochoa
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 07/04/2020 14:34, Michael Matz wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Apr 2020, Erick Ochoa wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for this lead! It is almost exactly what I need. I do have one more
> >> question about this. It seems that the types obtaine
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 4:39 PM Shubham Narlawar via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am working on gcc-4.9.4 and encountered different results of loop
> vectorization on array arr0, arr1 and arr2.
>
> Testcase -
>
> int main()
> {
> int i;
> for (i=0; i<64; i++)
> {
> arr2[i]=(
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:10 PM Kewen.Lin via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This is one question origining from PR61837, which shows that doloop
> pass could introduce some loop invariants against its outer loop when
> doloop performs and prepares the iteration count for hardware
> count register ass
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:05 PM Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-04-20 at 15:29 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 3:13 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2020-04-20 at 14:47 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Over at RTEMS, we were discussing
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:45 PM Giuliano Belinassi
wrote:
>
> Hi. Sorry for the late reply.
>
> On 03/02, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 6:56 PM Giuliano Belinassi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, all.
> > >
> > > I am
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:42 AM Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
> on 2020/4/17 下午7:32, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:10 PM Kewen.Lin via Gcc wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This is one question origining from PR61837, which shows
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 5:56 PM Giuliano Belinassi
wrote:
>
> Hi, Richi
>
> On 04/21, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:45 PM Giuliano Belinassi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi. Sorry for the late reply.
> > >
> > > On 03
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:47 AM Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Tamar Christina:
>
> > A bit late to the party, but this really doesn't work that well
> > because until recent version of gitlab there was no fairness
> > guarantee. another patch could be approved after mine (with hours
> > in between
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM Erick Ochoa
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to find out how to use the alias and/or points-to analysis
> in GCC. Ideally, I would like to find a function that given an
> allocation site, the return value is a set of pointers which may point
> to memory allocated from
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:04 PM Erick Ochoa
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 06/05/2020 14:25, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM Erick Ochoa
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I am trying to find out how to use the alias and
On May 6, 2020 11:15:08 PM GMT+02:00, Uros Bizjak via Gcc
wrote:
>Hello!
>
>I wonder, if the build process really needs to build all multilibs in
>stage-1 bootstrap build. IIRC, stage-1 uses system compiler to build
>stage-1 gcc, so there is no need for multilibs, apart from library
>that will be
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:25 AM Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 8:16 AM Richard Biener
> wrote:
> >
> > On May 6, 2020 11:15:08 PM GMT+02:00, Uros Bizjak via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >Hello!
> > >
> > >I wonder, if the build proce
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 9:25 PM Erick Ochoa
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 06/05/2020 18:40, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:04 PM Erick Ochoa
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 06/05/2020 14:25, Richard Biener wrote:
&g
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:24 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 09:02:58AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Hmm. IIRC it required special-handling in the individual libs - Jakub
> > may remeber (IIRC
> > he implemented short-cutting libsanitizer builds)
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:14 AM Thomas Neumann via Gcc wrote:
>
> > Not all GCC/G++ targets are GNU/Linux and use GLIBC. A duplicate
> > implementation in GLIBC creates its own set of advantages and
> > disadvantages.
>
> so what should I do now? Should I try to move the lookup into GLIBC? Or
> h
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:44 PM 易会战 via Gcc wrote:
>
> hi, I am working on gcc ssa name. For each function, we can traverse all
> defined ssa name by macro FOR_EACH_SSA_NAME. If a ssa name is default
> definition for a symbol (check SSA_NAME_IS_DEFAULT_DEF) , I can get the
> symbol by SSA_NAME_
chain of all memory statements local
to a function
with a _single_ underlying variable (.MEM) and thus only one SSA name
live at the same
time. It can be used to quickly traverse stores via use->def chains
and loads inbetween
two stores via immediate uses.
Richard.
> ---Original---
>
result does not escape the function
which means stores to it are dead once you leave it. For this reason
it does not
mark the memory global. So make sure the allocated pointer escapes
and try again.
>
>
> ---Original---
> From: "Richard Biener"
> Date: Tue, May 12, 2020 22:
ctalias.c in
compute_may_aliases,
the pass knows that a variable points to not escaped heap storage but this is
not stored anywhere ready for consumption. Adding a flag to
pt_solution would be easy though.
Richard.
> ---Original---
> From: "Richard Biener"
> Date: Wed, May 13, 2020 1
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:27 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> On 5/13/20 10:16 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > As far as this particular example goes, shouldn't the "testsuite/" line
> > be dropped from the above?
>
> Good point. Fixes now with:
>
> $ ./git_email.py
> patches/0020-IPA-Avoid-segfault-
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:38 AM 易会战 wrote:
>
> now I am working on gcc-9.3, can you give the specific code location to check
> not escaped heap? I try to add a flag.
set_uids_in_ptset
> ---Original---
> From: "Richard Biener"
> Date: Wed, May 13, 2020 17:2
ar, but the points-to cannnot give right answer.
>
> I do not know if this is the points-to analysis problem, or improper use it.
GCCs analysis is not powerful enough to provide "right" answers you
are seeking for. GCCs analysis provides conservative correct answers
for the users i
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:00 PM Giuliano Belinassi via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Hi, all.
>
> GCC have a extensive testsuite, that is no news at all. However they are
> focused on the compiler (cc1*) or in libraries, and I can't find tests
> related to the GCC driver.
>
> Are there tests to the GCC driver?
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:37 PM Giuliano Belinassi
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 05/22, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:00 PM Giuliano Belinassi via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, all.
> > >
> > > GCC have a extensive tests
1801 - 1900 of 2622 matches
Mail list logo
