--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-01 23:14 ---
Here is a simplier testcase which shows the problem is even worse:
int gif_read_lzw(int input_code_size)
{
int i;
short code_size = 0;
for (i = 0; i < input_code_size; i ++)
code_size ++;
return code_siz
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-01 23:16 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
>
> > What is the minimum binutils required by gcc? Does it support movq?
>
> install.texi says that i?86-linux-gnu requires 2.13.1.
>
> Since you are listed as
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-01 23:18 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
>
> > install.texi says that i?86-linux-gnu requires 2.13.1.
>
> binutils-2.13.1.tar.bz2 07-Nov-2002 23:45 9.5M
> binutils-2.13.1.tar.gz0
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-01 23:20 ---
And nothing removes the duplicated debug statements that are outside the loop
until rtl dce comes around. And it removes the debug statements which had line
information too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Comment #13 from tjgolubi at netins dot net 2010-03-01 23:23 ---
Subject: Re: std::unique_ptr::reset() does not conform to N3035.
I think you are correct now. Thank you for the explanation.
terry
- Original Message -
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu dot org"
To:
Sent: Monda
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-01 23:32 ---
Still getting:
D.41749_31 = n_13 + 4294967295;
D.41750_32 = (long unsigned int) D.41749_31;
D.41751_49 = D.41750_32 + 1;
Reduced testcase:
int f(int *a, int n, int *b)
{
n = n >> 2;
do {
*b = *a;
a
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-01 23:34 ---
For 4.2, we use three IVs; while from 4.3 and above, we use one IV.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-03-02 00:00
---
Yes, this is intended. For details see, for example:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2831.html
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #14 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 00:40 ---
Subject: Bug 43183
Author: redi
Date: Tue Mar 2 00:40:28 2010
New Revision: 157158
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157158
Log:
2010-03-02 Jonathan Wakely
PR libstdc++/43183
--- Comment #15 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 00:41 ---
Fixed. Version checked in uses swap:
void
reset(pointer __p = pointer())
{
using std::swap;
swap(std::get<0>(_M_t), __p);
if (__p != pointer())
get_deleter()(__p);
Source:
#include
void dequant_lsps(double *lsps, int num,
const unsigned short *values,
int n_stages, const unsigned char * __restrict table,
const double * __restrict mul_q, const double * __restrict
base_q)
{
const unsigned char *t_off =
--- Comment #1 from astrange at ithinksw dot com 2010-03-02 03:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=20002)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20002&action=view)
x86-64 asm output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43224
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 03:53 ---
I think what GCC is doing is correct as lsps could conflict with mul_q and
base_q as lsps is not marked as restrict.
Doing this:
#include
void dequant_lsps(double *__restrict lsps, int num,
const u
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 03:56 ---
In fact that is correct, see PR 14192 for the reasons why.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from astrange at ithinksw dot com 2010-03-02 04:00 ---
Is it possible for aliased writes to affect a const pointer? I was assuming
that it wasn't.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43224
Source:
#include
struct a1 { char l[16];};
struct a2 { __m128i l; };
void f1(struct a1 *a, struct a1 *b)
{
*a = *b;
}
void f2(struct a2 *a, struct a2 *b)
{
*a = *b;
}
> /usr/local/gcc45/bin/gcc -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -S copy_gcc.c
_f1:
movq(%rsi), %rax
movq%r
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:23 PM, "astrange at ithinksw dot com" > wrote:
Source:
#include
struct a1 { char l[16];};
Are sure that struct has 128 bit alignment because I think it only has
8bit alignment.
struct a2 { __m128i l; };
void f1(struct a1 *a, struct a1 *b)
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-03-02 05:24 ---
Subject: Re: New: Structure copies not vectorized
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:23 PM, "astrange at ithinksw dot com"
wrote:
> Source:
>
> #include
>
> struct a1 { char l[16];};
Are sure that struct ha
--- Comment #2 from astrange at ithinksw dot com 2010-03-02 05:31 ---
-fdump-tree-slp-details:
copy_gcc.c:8: note: ===vect_slp_analyze_bb===
copy_gcc.c:8: note: === vect_analyze_data_refs ===
Creating dr for *b_2(D)
analyze_innermost: success.
base_address: b_2(D)
offset
--- Comment #13 from rwild at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 06:10 ---
Subject: Bug 42980
Author: rwild
Date: Tue Mar 2 06:09:56 2010
New Revision: 157159
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157159
Log:
Small multilib rule fixups.
libgcc/:
PR other/42980
--- Comment #9 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 07:37 ---
Not working on this.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigned
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 07:44 ---
Subject: Bug 43220
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 2 07:44:03 2010
New Revision: 157160
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157160
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2010-03-01 Richard Guent
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 07:47 ---
Fixed also on 4.4 branch.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-02 07:54 ---
Line info on debug stmts/DEBUG_INSNs is ignored.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43222
101 - 124 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
