Re: 4.2 Project: "@file" support

On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 06:09:25PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Andi Kleen: > > > Linux has a similar limit which comes from the OS (normally around 32k) > > So it would be useful there for extreme cases too. > > IIRC, FreeBSD has a rather low limit, too. And there were discussions > about

Re: RFC - COST of const_double for x86 prevents constant copy propagation in cse

On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 12:37:32PM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Fariborz Jahanian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Forgot to attach the patch: > > > > Index: i386.c > > === > > RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/config/i386/i386.c,v > >

Any plan to support Windows/x86-64?

Is there any plan to support Windows/x86-64? What are needed for the port? H.J.

Adding debug symbols causes segmentation faults with GCC-4.1 and MIPS...

Greetings. I attempted to search through Bugzilla, but I did not find anything that matched my query. When using the options '-O0' and '-g' together with GCC-4.1.0, I get an executable that will segfault. If I use all the other optimizations of -O1, -O2 or -Os I do not have this problem. I am usi

Re: Adding debug symbols causes segmentation faults with GCC-4.1 and MIPS...

Eric Christopher wrote: I've not seen it, but do you see it with, say, those options and the simulator testsuite? (I don't have one built at the moment or I'd check myself.) I assume you mean using the gdb simulator, or what? Sorry for my ignorance. Otherwise, what's the code look like

Re: Adding debug symbols causes segmentation faults with GCC-4.1 and MIPS...

Joe Buck wrote: You might want to first make sure that your program has no memory access errors. You could try building it for x86 and debugging with valgrind, to see if that catches anything. A good idea. I built it for x86. Unfortunately, from the output it appears that 'clone' is not suppo

Re: Adding debug symbols causes segmentation faults with GCC-4.1 and MIPS...

The interesting thing to note is that if I edit this and only do one clone call, things work. As soon as I attempt to do a second clone, things fall apart when debugging symbols with '-O0 -g' are compiled. Again, the source link is below. I am going to have to make a note of this bug and come back

Corrupted CVS respository?

As of Wed Sep 14 08:55:04 PDT 2005, I got # ./contrib/gcc_update ... P gcc/version.c cvs [update aborted]: branch attribute does not match file for `/cvs/gcc/gcc/zlib/contrib/dotzlib/DotZLib.build,v' Has anyone else seen it? H.J.

Gcc 4.1 has been failing SPEC CPU 2000 on 64bit platforms

http://people.redhat.com/dnovillo/spec2000/ shows that gcc 4.1 has been failing vortex in SPEC CPU 2000 on Linux/EM64T and Linux/PPC64 at least since Aug. 7, 2005. The current gcc 4.1 also failed vortex on Linux/ia64. Is that a known issue? I got (gdb) r lendian1.raw Starting program: /export/spe

Re: GCC 4.0.2 Status

On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 07:58:46AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Now that Benjamin and Eric have fixed the Solaris issues in libstdc++ > (yay!), I know of no reason not to spin a release. I'm going to take a > final pass through the open PRs and look for show-stoppers. Is anyone > aware of regres

3.3/3.4 HOT_TEXT_SECTION_NAME problem

Gcc 3.3/3.4 has #ifndef HOT_TEXT_SECTION_NAME #define HOT_TEXT_SECTION_NAME "text.hot" #endif #ifndef UNLIKELY_EXECUTED_TEXT_SECTION_NAME #define UNLIKELY_EXECUTED_TEXT_SECTION_NAME "text.unlikely" #endif It is fixed in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-04/msg00810.html Should they be upd

Re: GCC 4.0.2 Released

On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 10:54:22AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > >>My inclination is to do nothing (other than correct the target > >>milestones on these bugs in bugzilla) and move on. The Solaris problem > >>is bad, and I beat up on Benjamin to get it fixed, but I'm

Question on i386 stack adjustment optimization

I modified the gcc i386 backend. Now my gcc optimizes function prologue movq%rbx, -16(%rsp) movq%rbp, -8(%rsp) subq$16, %rsp to movq%rbx, -16(%rsp) movq%rbp, -8(%rsp) pushq %rax pushq %rax The change was introduced b

Re: Question on i386 stack adjustment optimization

On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:10:52PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > I modified the gcc i386 backend. Now my gcc optimizes function prologue > > > > movq%rbx, -16(%rsp) > > movq%rbp, -8(%rsp) > > subq$16, %rsp > > > > to > > movq%rbx, -16(%rsp) > > movq%rbp, -8

MIPS TLS relocation assembly code invalid from GCC-4.1...

I have spent the last couple of hours groking code and I am coming up empty on this one. I ran into this problem when trying to build the 'tst-tls10' test program from glibc. This is not a glibc problem, rather an issue with my library and kernel header files, I think. I have ported NPTL support f

Re: MIPS TLS relocation assembly code invalid from GCC-4.1...

Jim Wilson wrote: Those aren't symbolic registers. Those are variable names. Try looking at the input file tst-tls10.c, and notice that it has variable names a1, a2, and a3. So somehow, in your output, the variable name a1 got replaced with the register name $5, which won't work. *blush

Re: Problem building svn on x86-64

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 01:43:28PM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote: > I'm trying to build svn from sources on my x86-64 machine and get: > > cd subversion/libsvn_subr && /bin/sh /gcc/gcc/subversion-1.2.3/libtool > --tag=CC --silent --mode=link gcc -g -O2 -g -O2 -pthread -DNEON_ZLIB > -rpath /us

Re: Problem building svn on x86-64

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 03:10:58PM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote: > Do you have the 64bit version of libgdbm.so under /usr/lib64? > > Yes. The question is why it isn't getting used. Add --verbose to ld and post the ld command line as well as its output. H.J.

The Linux binutils 2.16.91.0.4 os released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.16.91.0.4 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2005 0821 in CVS on sources.redhat.com plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. The new i386/x86_64 assemblers no longer accept instructions for moving between a segment register and a 32bit memory location

Add revision number to gcc version?

The current "gcc --version" prints out gcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20051113 (experimental) Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Can we change it

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 12:52:49PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:14 AM, H. J. Lu wrote: > >Can we change it to something like > > > >gcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20051113 (revision 106863) (experimental) > > Doesn't work, unless you also have the branch name.

Accidentally on the list....

Hi all; I misunderstood what this list was for and ended up on it. No instructions on the messages on how to get off and I don't' remember where I went to get on.. Can someone point me? Thanks. Eric

Is libgfortran in 4.1 compatible with 4.2?

SPEC CPU 2K FP compiled with gcc 4.2 failed to run with libgfortran from gcc 4.1. Is this expected? If yes, I think we should bump up libgfortran version in 4.2. H.J.

RFC: Make is a HUGE memory hog

On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 10:33:31PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 11:45:21AM +, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Alan Modra writes: > > > On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 12:35:31AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > > > spawns a recursive make (GNU make 3.80) that consumes some 450MB of > >

How to rebuild stage 1?

How can I rebuild stage 1 compiler with the system compiler? I used to be able to do # cd gcc # make unstage1 # make restage1 But now ./prev-gcc/xgcc is used to build stage 1 compiler, not the system compiler. H.J.

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 02:05:47PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 12:52:49PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > > On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:14 AM, H. J. Lu wrote: > > >Can we change it to something like > > > > > >gcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20051113 (revision 106

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:10PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > H. J. Lu wrote: > >On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 02:05:47PM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > >>On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 12:52:49PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > >> > >>>On Nov 14, 2005, at 9:14 AM, H.

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 04:09:41PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:10PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > > > >>I like this, but what if you also did an svn status to see if there were > >>any modifications WRT the branch/revision and then add either

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 06:03:25PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > H. J. Lu wrote: > >On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 04:09:41PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > > > >>Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >> > >>>On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:10PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > &

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 03:58:05PM +1100, Ben Elliston wrote: > > I like this, but what if you also did an svn status to see if there > > were any modifications WRT the branch/revision and then add either > > 'clean' or 'modified' to the information. > > I think this is a good idea (and don't mind

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 06:35:29PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 03:00:10PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > > I like this, but what if you also did an svn status to see if there were > > any modifications WRT the branch/revision and then add either 'clean' or > > 'modified

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 12:07:54PM +0100, Volker Reichelt wrote: > > 1. contrib/gcc_update creates gcc/REVISION with branch name and > > revision number. > > 2. If gcc/REVISION exists, it will be used in gcc/version.c. > > > > With those 2 patches, I got > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc]$ ./xgcc --v

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 01:26:18PM +, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 05:02, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > > > In my patch, gcc/REVISION is created by gcc_update. If you don't use > > gcc_update, gcc/REVISION may not be there. > > > > In any

Does lang_checks_parallel only support check-gcc?

There are [EMAIL PROTECTED] gcc]$ grep lang_checks Makefile.in lang_checks=check-gcc lang_checks_parallel = $(lang_checks:=//%) $(lang_checks_parallel): site.exp $(lang_checks): check-% : $(TESTSUITEDIR)/site.exp Will adding @check_languages@ to lang_checks to make it support other languages? H

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 02:56:43PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote: > Subversion provides an "opt-in" version of keyword substitution, and > provides a $Revision$ keyword. It might take a little scriptery to > get that into the form GCC wants. > > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.advanced.props

Re: Add revision number to gcc version?

On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 06:04:46PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote: > On Dec 19, 2005, at 5:34 PM, Jim Blandy wrote: > >On 12/19/05, Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>But it doesn't do what people really want it to by design. :-( > > > >And that would be? > > http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html

The Linux binutils 2.16.91.0.5 is released

This is the beta release of binutils 2.16.91.0.5 for Linux, which is based on binutils 2005 1219 in CVS on sources.redhat.com plus various changes. It is purely for Linux. The new x86_64 assembler no longer accepts monitor %eax,%ecx,%edx You should use monitor %rax,%ecx,%edx or

Re: Installing GCC 4.1-20051223 on FreeBSD 6 failed

On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 10:53:43AM -0600, Jon Brisbin wrote: > Update: > > Just tarred everything up and stuck it on one of my servers, which has > 4GBs of physical RAM and 2GBs of swap. Same problem: "virtual memory > exhausted". If 6GBs isn't enough, then I'm out of ideas. > > I tried patchin

RFC: An option to link against static gcc libraries

Gcc build executable linking against dynamic libraries by default. "-static" will link against all static libraries. For run-time portability, we may want to link against static gcc libraries, like libstdc++.a, libgfortran.a, libgcj.a, , but against dynamic system libraries, when we building ex

Re: RFC: An option to link against static gcc libraries

On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 01:56:16PM -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Dec 30, 2005, at 1:53 PM, H. J. Lu wrote: > > >Gcc build executable linking against dynamic libraries by default. > >"-static" will link against all static libraries. For run-time > >por

Re: RFC: An option to link against static gcc libraries

On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 08:05:13PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 10:58:16AM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > One, this will not work at all libobjc or libgcj since they > > > require lookups at runtime. > > > > Are you saying "gcc -static

Do the current gcc 3.4 and glibc 2.3 in CVS work on ia64?

With the current gcc 3.4 and glibc 2.3 in CVS, I got [EMAIL PROTECTED] glibc-2.3-import-3.4]$ gdb ./build-ia64-linux/elf/ld-linux-ia64.so.2GNU gdb Red Hat Linux (6.3.0.0-1.62rh) Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc. GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you a

Re: Do the current gcc 3.4 and glibc 2.3 in CVS work on ia64?

On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:08:29AM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > With the current gcc 3.4 and glibc 2.3 in CVS, I got > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] glibc-2.3-import-3.4]$ gdb > ./build-ia64-linux/elf/ld-linux-ia64.so.2GNU gdb Red Hat Linux > (6.3.0.0-1.62rh) > Copyright 2004 Free Softwa

Re: svn access on RHEL 4.0

On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:35:36PM -0600, Bradley Lucier wrote: > I'm having all kinds of trouble running svn on my RHEL 4.0 system. A > typical example of what's happening is: > > euler-62% svn cleanup > svn: XML parser failed in 'gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/special' > > I first got that message whe

Announcement: 2006 GCC & GNU Toolchain Developers' Summit: Call for Papers

ieve should be aware of this announcement please forward it on our behalf. If you have a suggestion on where we can announce it but do not wish to forward it yourself please let us know. Thank you for your participation that's what makes everything in Free Software work. Andrew J. Hutton

Mainline failed to bootstrap

Due to http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00837.html I got cc1: warnings being treated as errors /export/gnu/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/fold-const.c: In function ‘fold_minmax’: /export/gnu/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/fold-const.c:7194: warning: ‘compl_code’ may be used uninitialized in this function make[5]:

PATCH: Mainline failed to bootstrap

On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 11:53:31AM -0800, H. J. Lu wrote: > Due to > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00837.html > > I got > > cc1: warnings being treated as errors > /export/gnu/src/gcc/gcc/gcc/fold-const.c: In function ‘fold_minmax’: > /export/gnu/s

Re: The testsuite is way broken right now

On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 09:17:17AM +0100, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The testsuite is way broken and does not run all the tests: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-01/msg00878.html > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-01/msg00876.h

Re: Calls to malloc during an exception

On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:41:39AM -0600, Perry Smith wrote: > In the course of doing my work last week to get exception handling > working in my device driver, I learned that the exception processing > code calls malloc during the exception. This seems weak to me. It > seems like one of th

problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

Hi, I just wrote this little program to demonstrate a possible flaw in both malloc and calloc. If I allocate a the simplest memory region from main(), one out of three optimization flags fail. If I allocate the same region from a function, three out of three optimization flags fail. Does some

Re: problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:29 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Michael J. Baars > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I just wrote this little program to demonstrate a possible flaw in both > > malloc and calloc. > > > > If I allocate a t

Re: problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:41 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:37 AM Michael J. Baars > wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:29 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Michael J. Baars > > > wrote: > > > &

Re: problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 10:50 +0100, Gabriel Ravier via Gcc wrote: > On 2/22/21 10:37 AM, Michael J. Baars wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:29 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Michael J. Baars > > > wrote: > > > > Hi, &g

Re: problems with memory allocation and the alignment check

On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:41 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:37 AM Michael J. Baars > wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-02-22 at 01:29 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 1:17 AM Michael J. Baars > > > wrote: > > > &

About BZ#87210 [RFE] To initialize automatic stack variables

n? Thank you.---   -P J P http://feedmug.com

Re: About BZ#87210 [RFE] To initialize automatic stack variables

On Tuesday, 19 February, 2019, 3:55:35 PM IST, P J P wrote: > >Hello, > >  -> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210 > >This RFE is about providing gcc option(s) to eliminate information leakage >issues from programs. Information leakage via uninitialised me

Re: GSoC Project Ideas

be to resolve as many as one can over the summer. Interesting! >Would any of these ideas work as a GSoC project?   -> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2019-03/msg00016.html   -> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87210 Could this RFE be considered for a GSoC project? Thank you. ---   -P J P http://feedmug.com

Uu

Bruce Berman Carlton Fields Off: +1 (305) 539-7415 Cell: +1 (305) 975-3467

loop hoisting fails

Hi, I am facing a problem with code hoisting from a loop in our backend. This problem seems to be hinted at on: -fbranch-target-load-optimize Perform branch target register load optimization before prologue / epilogue threading. The use of target registers can typically be exposed only dur

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 09/02/11 15:07, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: You need to set TARGET_RTX_COSTS to indicate that this operation is relatively expensive. That should stop combine from generating it. Thanks, I will give it a try. One of the things that are not as polished as it should is exactly the rtx costs. I

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 09/02/11 15:57, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: For your processor it sounds like you should make a constant more expensive than a register for an outer code of SET. You're right that the cost should really depend on the destination of the set but unfortunately I don't know if you will see that. I a

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 09/02/11 15:57, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: For your processor it sounds like you should make a constant more expensive than a register for an outer code of SET. You're right that the cost should really depend on the destination of the set but unfortunately I don't know if you will see that. I

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 10/02/11 16:04, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Bother. I've encountered that problem before and I think I used a sledgehammer (a local patch). It's definitely a bug that gcse doesn't consider costs. At least I am happy that you confirm this. :) Have you reported a bug for this before?

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 10/02/11 17:59, Richard Henderson wrote: If constants are never valid as the source of a store, They are but it really depends to which registers they are going to. If the destination belongs to a certain class it is ok, for all the others it is not. It is tricky even to define costs when

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 10/02/11 16:04, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Bother. I've encountered that problem before and I think I used a sledgehammer (a local patch). It's definitely a bug that gcse doesn't consider costs. I think I might try also patching my local gcc. I guess the trick is to check for the cost of th

Re: Reloading an auto-increment addresses

On 11/02/11 09:46, Mohamed Shafi wrote: How can i overcome this failure? Can some one suggest a solution? Have you defined TARGET_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS_P and also BASE_REG_CLASS correctly for your target?

Volatile memory is not general operand

Hi, I just noticed something very surprising. There's a clause in general_operand (recog.c): if (! volatile_ok && MEM_VOLATILE_P (op)) return 0; Oh... so, a MEM_VOLATILE_P is _not_ a general operand? Why? This is also not referred to in the documentation of general operand so it

Re: Volatile memory is not general operand

On 11/02/11 12:03, Eric Botcazou wrote: if (! volatile_ok&& MEM_VOLATILE_P (op)) return 0; . It's more of the other way around: MEM_VOLATILE_P is a general operand unless explicitly requested via init_recog_no_volatile. Some passes, like combine, don't track the volatileness o

Re: Volatile memory is not general operand

On 11/02/11 13:56, Michael Matz wrote: The piece of code you quoted also is conditional on volatile_ok. Connect that with what Eric said. Thanks Michael, I guess I should sleep before asking anything else. Now I understand what Eric said.

Re: loop hoisting fails

On 11/02/11 19:41, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: My case was somewhat different. I think I just patched gcse_constant_p. Thanks!

Using cc (question from avr)

Hi, I am having some trouble really understanding the working of cc_status. In order to understand it better I was looking at the code for avr under gcc 4.3. My assumption is that set_zn, set_* means that an instructions _changes_ these flags. So an instruction that set_zn means that Z and N

mov arguments are still the same

Hi, I have touched this subject before: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.devel/116198/focus=116200 Now, at the time I didn't pursue this issue but now with 4.4.4 this keeps happening and I traced it to the cprop_hardreg replacing a register which makes the set insn having the same source

avr compilation

Hi all, I am looking at the avr backend in order to try to sort some things out on my own backend. One of the tests I am doing is by compiling the following: int x = 0x1010; int y = 0x0101; int add(void) { return x+y; } It compiles to (in gcc-4.3.5_avr with -Os) add: /* prologue: function

Re: avr compilation

ss it's probably something else... Best, Jiong On 03/18/2011 04:47 PM, Paulo J. Matos wrote: Hi all, I am looking at the avr backend in order to try to sort some things out on my own backend. One of the tests I am doing is by compiling the following: int x = 0x1010; int y = 0x0101;

Re: avr compilation

On 18/03/11 12:10, David Brown wrote: If you are digging through the AVR backend and find ways to improve code sequences like this, the avr-gcc community would be very grateful. There is an avr-gcc mailing list at , which may be of interest

Re: avr compilation

On 18/03/11 13:26, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: note that the last moves are two QI moves, the add is HI. Yes, correct, this seems to cause some confusion on gcc side then... humm! Without splitting HI the moves will disappear, try -fno-split-wide-types. It does work! It's enabled by -O1, mayb

Re: avr compilation

On 18/03/11 14:20, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: -fsplit-wide-types is an improvement on most targets, in which ints and pointers have the size UNITS_PER_WORD. On AVR that appears not to be the case, and it seems possible that AVR should set flag_split_wide_types to 0 in TARGET_OPTION_OPTIMIZATION_TA

Re: mov arguments are still the same

Let me revive this thread and ask for suggestions/tips on the issue below. Cheers, PMatos On 16/03/11 18:19, Paulo J. Matos wrote: Hi, I have touched this subject before: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.devel/116198/focus=116200 Now, at the time I didn't pursue this issue bu

Re: Supporting multiple pointer sizes in GCC

On 30/03/11 08:57, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote: Hi, I would try using the named address space for your issue (see TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_POINTER_MODE). Please check the SPU target for an implementation example. Hummm, I haven't noticed this hook before. Could this be used to implement cases where fu

Truncating df to sf (and typo in code)

Hi, I have been looking at the fp-bit code and noticed: /* numeric parameters */ /* F_D_BITOFF is the number of bits offset between the MSB of the mantissa of a float and of a double. Assumes there are only two float types. (double::FRAC_BITS+double::NGARDS-(float::FRAC_BITS-float::NGARDS))

Volatile memory move

Hi, I am running into trouble with a volatile memory move on my port of GCC4.4.4. The code is: int main(void) { register volatile float sc = 1E35; if(sc < 1.5e35) return 1; return 0; } The very first part of this code is being expanded as: ;; sc ={v} 1.00040918478759629

GCC 4.6.1 release date?

I was reviewing the status update of GCC4.6.1 released on the gcc.gnu.org website on 20110426. The update states that GCC4.6.1 will be released sometime in late May. Does anyone know the exact date of the release? We are working on a Fortran code that needs a gfortran fix that was committed to th

MULTILIB_EXTRA_OPTS and LIBGCC2_CFLAGS

Hi all, I am quite confused about the difference between the above two options in Makefile fragments. They both seem to be doing the same thing which is to set the options to build libgcc2 with. The only thing that comes to mind is that LIBGCC2_CFLAGS only applies to the main library and M

Re: MULTILIB_EXTRA_OPTS and LIBGCC2_CFLAGS

On 17/06/11 15:22, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: LIBGCC2_CFLAGS applies only to libgcc (all multilib versions of libgcc). MULTILIB_EXTRA_OPTS applies to all target libraries (libstdc++, libjava, libgo, etc.). Thanks for clearing that up for me. Since I am focused on the C frontend only I actually

LIBGCC2_FLAGS not used by libgcc2 configure?

Hi, There are some flags that are needed by the target to build libgcc2. I am keeping those in TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS. However, compilation is failed even before the building begins because configure fails. While trying to compile test programs configure is using TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS. This see

Re: LIBGCC2_FLAGS not used by libgcc2 configure?

On 18/06/11 00:00, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: You are saying that configure is using TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS, but that you want to set something so that it uses TARGET_LIBGCC2_FLAGS? Are you missing a "not" in there somewhere? Or do I misunderstand? Thanks for the reply Ian. I am using MULTILIBS.

Re: LIBGCC2_FLAGS not used by libgcc2 configure?

On 20/06/11 13:08, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: Yes, it's libgcc/configure that's failing. So, you mean I should MULTILIB_EXTRA_OPTS=-mas-mode in my t- makefile fragment? Yes. I will give that a try. Alternatively, you implied that your backend always needs this option. In that case you could m

Re: LIBGCC2_FLAGS not used by libgcc2 configure?

On 21/06/11 19:01, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: CFLAGS. CFLAGS_FOR_BUILD is for code compiled for the build system. CFLAGS is for code compiled for the host system. CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET is for code compiled for the target system. The driver and the compiler as a whole run on the host system. The bu

__function_size builtin

Hello, I have added a builtin __function_size that is supposed to receive a pointer to a function and return the size, in words, that the function takes. We got it working until GCC4.5. In GCC4.5 became tricky for 2 reasons. First, GCC 4.5 removes the function if the only reference to the f

Re: __function_size builtin

On 22/06/11 16:23, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: You don't need to do that, you just need to tell the assembler to not fully resolve the difference between two text symbols, but to leave it to the linker as a PC-relative reloc. In gas you typically do this by defining DIFF_EXPR_OK in your config/tc-CP

Re: __function_size builtin

On 22/06/11 17:34, Paulo J. Matos wrote: I thought this was the same as using __attribute__((used)) on a function declaration (which works). DECL_PRESERVE_P(node) = 1; seems to be what I wanted. :)

Re: __function_size builtin

On 22/06/11 23:25, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: "Paulo J. Matos" writes: On 22/06/11 17:34, Paulo J. Matos wrote: I thought this was the same as using __attribute__((used)) on a function declaration (which works). DECL_PRESERVE_P(node) = 1; seems to be what I wanted. :) I alway

cgraph callees availability

Hi, In TARGET_FUNCTION_OK_FOR_SIBCALL I use the number of callees of the current_function_decl to decide if a sibcall should be done. I have: int aaa[9]; __attribute__ ((noinline)) int *foo(void) { return aaa; } __attribute__ ((noinline)) void bar(int *a) { a[0] = 0x1234; } void test(void)

Re: cgraph callees availability

On 01/07/11 09:38, Paulo J. Matos wrote: In GCC4.4 function test presents 2 callees foo() and bar() and the sibcall is not done. In GCC4.5 the sibcall is done (but shouldn't) because callees in cgraph is 0x0. I wonder if this information is not available anymore at this point and if th

Re: cgraph callees availability

On 01/07/11 10:31, Richard Guenther wrote: It is being done because the edges are not kept up-to-date. There is no other way to find callees but to walk all statements. I also do not see a good reason why you would want to use the number of callees of a function to decide whether to emit sibca

Re: cgraph callees availability

On 01/07/11 10:46, Richard Guenther wrote: You could add this logic to the tree-tailcall.c pass. I suppose what you really want is no dominating call rather than only a single call in total. Yes, that's true. I am currently porting the backend to 4.6.1 so I might do the changes in tree-tail

GCC 4.6.1 likes to rename my functions

Hi all, I have finally ported my backend to the latest 4.6.1 after years of trying to play catch with the latest release version. I am now fixing some details. A source file has a function called: lm_change_to_active which, when compiled with -Os is inlined. When I compile it with -fno-inlin

Re: GCC 4.6.1 likes to rename my functions

On 06/07/11 16:08, Richard Guenther wrote: See cgraph.c:clone_function_name, it uses the NO_DOT_IN_LABEL and NO_DOLLAR_IN_LABEL target macros and ASM_FORMAT_PRIVATE_NAME. I don't see where a '?' should enter this picture anywhere. Thanks, exactly what I needed! Thanks also to Jakub who rep

gcc 4.6.1 expand is playing tricks on me

Hi, I got a few size regressions when moving from 4.5.3 to 4.6.1, all due to the same issue. I have code that is basically a double word memory move: void simple1(uint32 *a, uint32 *b) { *a = *b; } GCC 4.6.1 is from this gimple: simple1 (uint32 * a, uint32 * b) { uint32 D.1927; # BLOCK 2

Re: gcc 4.6.1 expand is playing tricks on me

On 08/07/11 15:35, Michael Matz wrote: Without TERing these two instructions expand won't see both memory references at the same time, and hence generate separate load and store instruction, instead of a mem-mem move if that's supported on your target (I assume so, otherwise you wouldn't have not

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >