Hi Jeff, Steven,
This is the updated patch according to your comments. The main changes
includes:
1. Enable the option for all target at Os level by default.
2. Add a target independent test case.
3. Add comments on how the algorithm works.
4. Simplify the calculation of register pressure info by
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Easwaran Raman wrote:
> Hi,
> In the expression reassociation pass, statements might get moved
> downwards to ensure that dependences are not violated after
> reassociation. This can increase the live range and, in a tight loop,
> result in spills. This patch sim
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>>
>>> So, Jan Hubicka requested and approved the current spelling.
>>> What now?
>>
>> I don't think we should hold this up. T
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> On 9/19/12, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> On Sep 19, 2012 Richard Guenther wrote:
>> > Indeed. Btw, can we not provide a specialization for
>> > dynamic_cast <>? This ->try_... looks awkward to me compared
>> > to the more familiar
>> >
>>
In a different thread, I proposed the following alternative to 'try_xxx':
template T* symbol::cast_to(symbol* p) {
if (p->is())
return static_cast(p);
return 0;
}
cast:
template T& symbol:as(symbol* p) {
assert(p->is())
return static_cast(*p);
}
David
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012
Hi,
I'm committing the testcase and closing the PR as fixed. Tested
x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2012-10-10 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/43663
* g++.dg/init/bitfield3.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/init/bitfield3.C
=
Hi,
In the expression reassociation pass, statements might get moved
downwards to ensure that dependences are not violated after
reassociation. This can increase the live range and, in a tight loop,
result in spills. This patch simply does a code motion of those
statements involved in reassociati
On Thu, 4 Oct 2012, Jason Merrill wrote:
> Recent versions of binutils seem to have started putting ' around the version
> number in bfd/configure.in, which was confusing gcc configure. This patch
> allows us to detect the version number again.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
I committed my already-approved
On 12-10-03 7:11 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Hi Vlad,
Some comments on lra-spills.c and lra-coalesce.c.
+ The pass creates necessary stack slots and assign spilled pseudos
+ to the stack slots in following way:
s/assign/assigns/
Fixed.
+ (or insn memory constraints) might be not sati
The following patch implements most Richard's proposals for LRA
lra-spills.c and lra-coalesce.c files.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 192341.
2012-10-10 Vladimir Makarov
* lra-coalesce.c (removed_pseudos_bitmap): Remove.
(upda
>>> The potential savings here didn't seem worth the effort of adding a
>>> pass over another table to assign slots in .debug_addr. In practice,
>>> we're seeing very few slots zeroed out here.
>
> And how many duplicate entries? What strategy does Cary's patch use to
> avoid those?
I picked a co
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:56:29 +0200
> 2012-10-02 Jakub Jelinek
>
> cp/
> * cp-tree.h (SIZEOF_EXPR_TYPE_P): Define.
> * tree.c (cp_tree_equal): Handle SIZEOF_EXPR with
> SIZEOF_EXPR_TYPE_P.
...etc.
Looks like this caused a regression; PR54897,
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> I would like some clarity. Can I commit this patch?
I'm thinking, yes. I will be making the gengtype changes in time for
stage 1, so further renames can continue after those patches are in.
Jan, Richard? Any strong objections?
Diego.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
VEC_COND_EXPR is more complicated. We could for instance require that it
takes as first argument a vector of -1 and 0 (thus <0, !=0 and the neon
thing a
On 11 October 2012 00:09, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 18:49, Benjamin De Kosnik wrote:
>>
>>> I don't like the sched_yield macro being set there because it's
>>> detected correctly by configure anyway, but I'm not going to labour
>>> that point any more.
>>
>> Indeed. Then somebody w
On 9 October 2012 22:03, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 20:48, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>>
>> I think it is. The newlib ctype classification is identical to the
>> traditional BSD scheme that OpenBSD uses.
>
> OK, I'll commit your patch tomorrow, thanks.
it's on the trunk now, thanks for
On 9 October 2012 18:49, Benjamin De Kosnik wrote:
>
>> I don't like the sched_yield macro being set there because it's
>> detected correctly by configure anyway, but I'm not going to labour
>> that point any more.
>
> Indeed. Then somebody will waste hours in the future wondering why
> configure s
On 2012-10-10 16:52 , Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
* tree-asan.c: New file.
* tree-asan.h: New file.
Nit: do we still need the "tree-" prefix? IMHO not.
Richard Biener s
On 2012-10-10 16:48 , Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
* tree-asan.c: New file.
* tree-asan.h: New file.
Nit: do we still need the "tree-" prefix? IMHO not.
Good point. I'll rename them to asan.[ch].
Diego.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> What I did to address this is to call get_attr_mode from the machine model
> to get the actual mode of the insn. In this case, it returns MODE_SI.
> There doesn't seem to be any code that maps from the attr_mode (MODE_SI)
> to the machine_m
This patch was committed and ported to google-4_7 branch.
Thanks,
Dehao
gcc/ChangeLog:
2012-10-07 Dehao Chen
* tree-eh.c (lower_try_finally_onedest): Set correct location for
deallocator.
* gimplify.c (gimplify_expr): Set correct location for TRY stmt.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
2012-10-07 Dehao C
This patch addresses conservative behavior in redundant extend
elimination that was resulting in redundant extends not being
removed.
One of the checks is to ensure that the reaching definition doesn't
feed another extension with a different machine mode.
In this case, the extend we are trying to
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> Is there an agreed way for file naming?
>
> It was not my intent to start a bike shed discussion. This was just
> something I've been wondering for some time. But AFAIC it's up t
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Is there an agreed way for file naming?
It was not my intent to start a bike shed discussion. This was just
something I've been wondering for some time. But AFAIC it's up to
Diego&co to do what they think is right :-)
Ciao!
Steven
Is there an agreed way for file naming?
David
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> * tree-asan.c: New file.
>> * tree-asan.h: New file.
>
> Nit: do we still need the "tree-" prefix? IMHO not.
>
> Ciao!
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> * tree-asan.c: New file.
>> * tree-asan.h: New file.
>
> Nit: do we still need the "tree-" prefix? IMHO not.
Richard Biener suggested we use gimple- as the prefix fo
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> * tree-asan.c: New file.
> * tree-asan.h: New file.
Nit: do we still need the "tree-" prefix? IMHO not.
Ciao!
Steven
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> It is also interesting that your IRA range patch results in
> different code generation (i can not explain it too now). I saw the same
> on a small test (black jack playing and betting strategy).
I haven't looked into this, but I'm gue
On 2012-10-10 16:21 , Diego Novillo wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
I have created a temporary branch to host the port of ASAN to
trunk. Wei has done the initial port of the original code from
Kostya. It compiles but we still do not have the runtimes (Wei
is worki
On 10.10.12 22:00, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Andreas Tobler
wrote:
On 10.10.12 17:36, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Andreas Tobler
wrote:
FreeBSD has already defined the various Elf_ stuff for 32 and 64-bit
targets.
Currently com
>
>
> Running target unix
>
> === gcc Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 499
> # of unsupported tests5
> /home/howarth/work-gcc/gcc/xgcc version 4.8.0 20121010 (experimental) (GCC)
>
> === g++ tests ===
>
>
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> I have created a temporary branch to host the port of ASAN to
> trunk. Wei has done the initial port of the original code from
> Kostya. It compiles but we still do not have the runtimes (Wei
> is working on that).
The branch is in svn://g
I have created a temporary branch to host the port of ASAN to
trunk. Wei has done the initial port of the original code from
Kostya. It compiles but we still do not have the runtimes (Wei
is working on that).
I have not touched nor reviewed the code in detail. Right now
I'm interested in puttin
ble-tls
shows...
Native configuration is x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
=== gcc tests ===
Running target unix
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 499
# of unsupported tests 5
/home/howarth/work-gcc/gcc/xgcc version 4.8.0 20121010 (experimental) (GC
On 12-10-10 10:53 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch solves most of LRA scalability problems.
It switches on simpler algorithms in LRA. The first it switches off
trying to reassign hard registers to spilled pseudos (they
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Andreas Tobler
wrote:
> On 10.10.12 17:36, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Andreas Tobler
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> FreeBSD has already defined the various Elf_ stuff for 32 and 64-bit
>>> targets.
>>>
>>> Currently compilation in libba
"Maciej W. Rozycki" writes:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> > So I think this can't really be selected automatically for all cores,
>> > some human-supplied knowledge about the MD unit used is required -- that
>> > obviously affects other operations too, e.g. some multiplica
I have merged revision 192321 of the gcc 4.7 branch to the gccgo branch,
committed as revision 192330. This brings GCC 4.7.2 and Go 1.0.3 to the
gccgo branch.
This is the last merge I plan to do from 4.7 to the gccgo branch. After
this I plan to start merging from trunk to gccgo branch. The gcc
On Oct 10, 2012 3:05 PM, "Rainer Orth" wrote:
>
> As reported in the PR, abi_check fails on Solaris 10 and 11 since about
> 20120817. On Solaris 10, I get
>
> 1 incompatible symbols
> 0
> _ZNSt12system_errorC1ESt10error_codeRKSs
> std::system_error::system_error(std::error_code, std::string const&
Sorry, reading back in different surroundings made me notice a couple
of silly errors:
Richard Sandiford writes:
> E.g.:
>
> if ((*loc = get_equiv_substitution (reg)) != reg)
> ...as above...
> if (*loc != reg || !in_class_p (reg, cl, &new_class))
> ...as above...
> else if (new_cla
On 10.10.12 17:36, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Andreas Tobler wrote:
FreeBSD has already defined the various Elf_ stuff for 32 and 64-bit
targets.
Currently compilation in libbacktrace fails due to redefinition of these:
- Elf_Ehdr
- Elf_Sym
- Elf_Shdr
I 'fixed'
Vladimir Makarov writes:
> The following patch implements Richard's proposals from lra-lives.c review.
>
> The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86/x86-64.
>
> Committed as rev. 192326.
>
> 2012-10-10 Vladimir Makarov
>
> * lra-int.h (lra_live_range_in_p): Remove.
>
On 10/10/2012 07:16 PM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This bootstraps and causes no new regressions on the 4.7 branch.Is
it OK to check this into the 4.7 branch right now?
Yes, thanks.
Paolo.
On 12-10-02 10:14 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Sandiford writes:
+/* Merge ranges R1 and R2 and returns the result. The function
+ maintains the order of ranges and tries to minimize size of the
+ result range list. */
+lra_live_range_t
+lra_merge_live_ranges (lra_live_range_t r1,
On 12-10-02 9:42 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Vladimir Makarov writes:
This is the major patch containing all new files. The patch also adds
necessary calls to LRA from IRA.As the patch is too big, it continues in
the next email.
2012-09-27 Vladimir Makarov
* Makefile.in (LRA_INT_H)
The following patch implements Richard's proposals from lra-lives.c review.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 192326.
2012-10-10 Vladimir Makarov
* lra-int.h (lra_live_range_in_p): Remove.
* lra-lives.c (lra_copy_live_range_l
Hello!
For 64bit targets, we can use mxcsr register to set soft-FP rounding mode.
2012-10-10 Uros Bizjak
* config/i386/sfp-machine.h (FP_RND_NEAREST, FP_RND_ZERO, FP_RND_PINF,
FP_RND_MINF, FP_RND_MASK, FP_INIT_ROUNDMODE, _FP_DECL_EX): Move to ...
* config/i386/32/sfp-m
Hi!
This patch folds REDUC_*_EXPR (e.g. on pr54877.c -Ofast -mavx
testcase we end up with unfolded REDUC_PLUS_EXPR till *.optimized).
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2012-10-10 Jakub Jelinek
* fold-const.c (fold_unary_loc): Handle REDUC_MIN_EXPR,
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:42:10AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Ah, no, make_ssa_name (TREE_TYPE (rhs), NULL) is even better. On
> the 4.7 branch you need to create a new temp var ...
Ok, here is what I've committed to trunk after bootstrap/regtest:
2012-10-10 Jakub Jelinek
PR tree
This bootstraps and causes no new regressions on the 4.7 branch.Is
it OK to check this into the 4.7 branch right now?
Thanks
Andrew
Original Message
Subject:PR 54861 - libstdc++ header file typo
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2012 14:40:46 -0400
From: Andrew MacLeod
To
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Michael Meissner
wrote:
> No before I go an redo the main part of patch #2, I have a question, which
> people prefer.
>
> The current code has sequences of:
>
> target_flags |= MASK_FOO; /* set -mfoo */
> if ((target_flags_explicit & MASK_F
Seems like S M AA is shattering through shorts at the $.09 point and is wired
to take off past $0.15 this week. We should drive these shorters off the
barrier and we will all produce a vast profit on S M AA.
Today: October 10
Name: SMA Alliance
Symbol traded: S M AA
Closed Price: 0.12
Long Term
On 10/10/2012 06:02 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
I just have one question for own education.
Regarding:
@@ -2450,7 +2450,13 @@
if (array_p && TYPE_VEC_NEW_USES_COOKIE (elt_type))
size = size_binop (PLUS_EXPR, size, cookie_size);
else
- cookie_size = NULL_
Hello Florian,
Let's CC Jason for this optimization patch.
Florian Weimer a écrit:
> If the size of the inner array elements is 1 and we do not need a
> cookie, we do not need to insert an overflow check. This applies to
> the relatively frequent new char[n] case.
I just have one question for
On 2012-10-10 09:33 , Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
with at once. Perhaps "Rick" would be a good choice.
Last name "Astley"? Include links to videos, please.
Torbjorn complained that the GCC bugzilla requires an account. I
committed this patch to the web site to explain why.
Ian
Index: bugs/index.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/bugs/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.108
diff
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> 2012-10-10 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR middle-end/54862
> * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_truncation): Compare UINTVAL instead of
> INTVAL of second argument with precision resp. op_precision.
OK. Sorry for the breakage, and thanks for fixing it.
Richard
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:45 AM, Andreas Tobler wrote:
>
> FreeBSD has already defined the various Elf_ stuff for 32 and 64-bit
> targets.
>
> Currently compilation in libbacktrace fails due to redefinition of these:
>
> - Elf_Ehdr
> - Elf_Sym
> - Elf_Shdr
>
> I 'fixed' this with ifndef'ing. See b
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
> This fixes a problem with my PR45844 fix. PR45844 was due to rs6000.c
> reg_offset_addressing_ok_p testing the operand mode to determine
> whether an insn supports reg+offset addressing, but the VSX splat insn
> uses a DF/DI mode input operand.
The pattern prologue_use is emitted for both prologue and epilogue.
In particular, the assembly comment
"@sp needed for prologue"
is printed out for both prologue and epilogue.
This patch adds a separate pattern for epilogue_use and replaces
prologue_use with epilogue_use where appropriate.
No re
Hi,
in this PR, at variance with the C front-end, we don't check well enough
the aggregate type - in finish_struct_1 - and we ICE later. Then I'm
essentially copying from the C front-end the check. Some details:
1- In these checks, eg, no fields too, the C front-end only warns,
zeroes TYPE_T
As a result of adding LDRD/STRD patterns in Thumb mode, the compiler
generates LDRD/STRD instead of LDM/STM in some cases. This patch adjusts
existing tests to accept LDRD/STRD in addition to LDM/STM.
ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite
2012-09-13 Sameera Deshpande
Greta Yorsh
* gc
Generate epilogue using LDRD in Thumb mode when prefer_ldrd_strd is set in
tune_params.
ChangeLog
gcc/
2012-09-13 Sameera Deshpande
Greta Yorsh
* config/arm/arm.c (thumb2_emit_ldrd_pop): New function.
(arm_expand_epilogue): Use the new function.diff --git a/gcc/config
Generate prologue using STRD when prefer_ldrd_strd is set in tune_params.
ChangeLog
gcc/
2012-09-13 Sameera Deshpande
Greta Yorsh
* config/arm/arm.c (thumb2_emit_strd_push): New function.
(arm_expand_prologue): Use the new function.diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm
This patch adds define_insn patterns for LDRD and STRD in Thumb mode.
ChangeLog
gcc/
2012-09-13 Sameera Deshpande
Greta Yorsh
* config/arm/arm-protos.h (offset_ok_for_ldrd_strd): New
declaration.
(operands_ok_ldrd_strd): Likewise.
* config/arm/arm.c (off
On 09/10/12 07:34, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
On 2012/8/28 下午 04:14, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
On 12/7/12 5:47 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On 12 July 2012 07:52, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
ARM parts, no further notes.
ARM parts are ok, modulo approval for generic parts and no
regressions with testi
the others under gdb 4.5, though:
Starting program:
/var/gcc/gcc-4.8.0-20121010/10-gcc-gas/gcc/testsuite/g++/thread_local4g.exe
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread 1 (LWP 1)]
[New LWP2]
[LWP2 exited]
[New Thread 2]
thread_to_lwp: td_ta_m
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello Joseph,
>
> Please help to review this new Multilib feature. It intends to provide user
Your patch doesn't include documentation for fragments.texi (which needs
to define the semantics without reference to the details of what gcc.c's
internal datas
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch solves most of LRA scalability problems.
>
> It switches on simpler algorithms in LRA. The first it switches off
> trying to reassign hard registers to spilled pseudos (they usually for such
> huge functions have lon
Jack Howarth writes:
>Have you tried a gcc trunk build on linux configured to use emutls instead
> of tls to confirm that this issue is really darwin-specific? These failures
> might
> also appear on sparc-sun-solaris2.9 but we don't have recent gcc trunk
> testresults
> for that. Perhaps R
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
>
> Solaris 10 Update 10 or sufficiently recent linker patches introduced
> dl_iterate_phdr on S10 as a backport from Solaris 11, but unlike S11, it
> lives in libdl.so only. The current dl_iterate_phdr check misses that,
> and given that it's o
Generate prologue/epilogue using STRD/LDRD in Thumb mode, when tuning
prefer_ldrd_strd flag is set, such as in Cortex-A15.
[1/4] New RTL patterns for LDRD/STRD in Thumb mode
[2/4] Prologue using STRD in Thumb mode
[3/4] Epilogue using LDRD in Thumb mode
[4/4] Adjust tests gcc.target/arm/pr40457-*.
Hi,
FreeBSD has already defined the various Elf_ stuff for 32 and 64-bit
targets.
Currently compilation in libbacktrace fails due to redefinition of these:
- Elf_Ehdr
- Elf_Sym
- Elf_Shdr
I 'fixed' this with ifndef'ing. See below.
Bootstrap passed.
Is something like this ok for trunk?
Tha
Sorry, forgot to attach the patch. Here it is.
-Original Message-
From: Greta Yorsh
Sent: 10 October 2012 15:37
To: Greta Yorsh; GCC Patches
Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan; Richard Earnshaw; ni...@redhat.com;
p...@codesourcery.com
Subject: [PATCH, ARM][3/3] Adjust tests gcc.target/arm/interrupt
This patch adjusts the tests to accept LDRD or LDM, depending on effective
target arm_prefer_ldrd_strd. To handle the cases in which this test is not
valid, use effective target arm_notthumb instead of __thumb_ predefine.
With this patch, the test interrup-2.c will fail when arm_prefer_ldrd_strd
h
Emit epilogue using LDRD in ARM mode when prefer_ldrd_strd is set.
ChangeLog
gcc/
2012-10-10 Sameera Deshpande
Greta Yorsh
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_emit_ldrd_pop): New function.
(arm_expand_epilogue): Used here.
(arm_emit_multi_reg_pop): Add a special ca
Emit prologue using STRD in ARM mode when tune parameter prefer_ldrd_strd is
set.
ChangeLog
gcc/
2012-09-13 Sameera Deshpande
Greta Yorsh
* config/arm/arm.c (emit_multi_reg_push): New declaration
for an existing function.
(arm_emit_strd_push): New functi
domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) a écrit:
> The following tests are failing (with -m32):
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for warnings, line 9)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-36.C (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/gen-attrs-37.C (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: g++.
Generate prologue/epilogue using STRD/LDRD in ARM mode, when tuning
prefer_ldrd_strd flag is set, such as in Cortex-A15.
[1/3] Prologue using STRD in ARM mode
[2/3] Epilogue using LDRD in ARM mode
[3/3] Adjust tests gcc.target/arm/interrupt-*.c
Testing and benchmarking:
* No regression on qemu fo
In the testsuite, distinguish between arm targets that prefer LDRD/STRD and
arm targets that prefer LDM/STM. This patch adds a new effective target test
and updates documentation accordingly.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Greta
ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite/
2012-09-13 Greta Yorsh
* gcc.target/a
This moves the location bitpacks to the bitpack pieces and adjust
the weird hooking that is in place currently.
I need to separate tree reference writers from data writers
for some major reorg.
LTO bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2012-10-10 Richard Biene
first referenced
symbol in file
dl_iterate_phdr
/var/gcc/gcc-4.8.0-20121010/10-gcc-gas/i386-pc-solaris2.10/./libgo/.libs/libgo.so
ld: fatal: symbol referencing errors. No output written to
/var/gcc/gcc-4.8.0-20121010/10-gcc-gas/gcc/testsuite/go/
As reported in the PR, abi_check fails on Solaris 10 and 11 since about
20120817. On Solaris 10, I get
1 incompatible symbols
0
_ZNSt12system_errorC1ESt10error_codeRKSs
std::system_error::system_error(std::error_code, std::string const&)
version status: incompatible
GLIBCXX_3.4.11
type: function
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> Unfortunately this donesn't improve the situation with the
> too many Richards ;)
I think you will find it easier to change your given name at the same
time that you are changing your surname, to get all the changes over
with at once. Pe
Hi,
adding the testcase and closing the PR as fixed in mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
//
2012-10-10 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/53122
* g++.dg/cpp0x/auto35.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto35.C
===
--- g++.dg/
On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:13:06PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 10/09/2012 04:36 PM, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>> ==36994== Address 0x1003cd2e0 is 16 bytes inside a block of size 536 free'd
>> ==36994==at 0x10001252D: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:430)
>> ==36994==by 0x1003B5CB2: emutls_d
On 10 Oct 2012, at 13:17, "Greta Yorsh" wrote:
> The test gcc.dg/pr54782.c uses command line option
> -ftree-parallelize-loops=2 which implies -pthread and thus the test fails on
> targets that do not support pthread, such as arm-none-eabi.
>
> This patch adds effective target check.
>
> Ok for
On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> It's an incorrect warning from an old version of GCC. Fixed like so.
> Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace testsuite on
> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
Another two in libbackend/elf.c, committed as obvious after
build passed the poin
The test gcc.dg/pr54782.c uses command line option
-ftree-parallelize-loops=2 which implies -pthread and thus the test fails on
targets that do not support pthread, such as arm-none-eabi.
This patch adds effective target check.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Greta
ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite
2012-10-05 G
On 10/10/2012 02:06 PM, Daniel Krügler wrote:
2012/10/10 Paolo Carlini :
... tested x86_64-linux. Committed to mainline.
I'd like to mention that this patch does not reflect what the core
language says, e.g.
static_assert(is_type, int>(), "");
Should assert, the correct result being int&&. Th
2012/10/10 Paolo Carlini :
> ... tested x86_64-linux. Committed to mainline.
I'd like to mention that this patch does not reflect what the core
language says, e.g.
static_assert(is_type, int>(), "");
Should assert, the correct result being int&&. The test currently
holds because of compiler bug
Hi guys,
>> Is it ok for release it into trunk and 4.7?
>
> Yes, please do so.
Checked into trunk: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00419.html
and 4.7: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00431.html
Thanks, K
... tested x86_64-linux. Committed to mainline.
Paolo.
2012-10-10 Paolo Carlini
* include/std/type_traits (__do_common_type_impl): Revert for now
LWG 2141-related change.
* testsuite/20_util/common_type/requirements/typedefs-1.cc: Likewise.
Hi,
The tests gcc.dg/vect/vect-82_64.c and gcc.dg/vect/vect-83_64.c are
failing on powerpc*-*-* (see for instance
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-10/msg01054.html ).
This is fixed with the following patch
diff -up gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-82_64.c
../work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vec
That was obvious. Sorry for the wrong commit.
Thanks Jakub.
-Ganesh
-Original Message-
From: Paolo Carlini [mailto:paolo.carl...@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 4:33 PM
To: Jakub Jelinek
Cc: Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh; Uros Bizjak; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org;
veku...@gcc.gnu.
On 10/10/2012 01:00 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
I have removed the extra line as obvious in SVN, to allow my
bootstraps to continue.
Thanks!
Paolo.
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:57:09PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 12:53 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >Yeah, clearly a different version of the patch has been posted
> >vs. what has been checked in. The difference is removal of the
> >(define_cpu_unit "bdver1-mult" "bdver1_mult")
> >line
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Depending on the system mkstemp might create the scratch files with 0666
> permission (e.g. glibc <= 2.06); for security reasons, it should use 0600.
> Thus, one is supposed to set a umask before calling the function (see, e.g.,
> the Linux
Hi,
On 10/10/2012 12:53 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Yeah, clearly a different version of the patch has been posted
vs. what has been checked in. The difference is removal of the
(define_cpu_unit "bdver1-mult" "bdver1_mult")
line (present in the posted patch, not in the checked in patch).
Also, th
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:29:04PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/03/2012 11:57 AM, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh wrote:
> >Testing was done before posting the patch. It was successful.
> This change is now in:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-10/msg00418.html
>
> and it looks
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
