On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> On 10/29/12, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On Oct 29, 2012 Diego Novillo wrote:
>> > Just to make sure. Testing on ppc should be fast, for example.
>>
>> And useless. Your patch does not touch ppc.
>
> I've fixed the #if 0 and the remaining su
Hi Jakub,
We are working on the following.
1. bdver3 enablement. Review completed. Changes to be incorporated and
checked-in.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-10/msg01131.html
2. btver2 basic enablement is done
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-07/msg01018.html)/
Scheduler descript
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:44 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
Hi,
This patch changes get_elimination to check register number instead of
RTX. Tested on
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:11 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Vladimir Makarov
>> wrote:
>>> On 12-10-29 12:21 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Vladimir Makarov writes:
>
> H.J. in
>
> http://gcc.
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:01 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:18 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:06:01AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> When indent == 0, we call alloca with -1 bytes. This patch changes
>>> it to indent + 1. This is a trunk only regression. OK t
This patch fixes three different failures I encountered while trying to use
-freorder-blocks-and-partition, including the failure reported in PR 53743.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Teresa
2012-10-29 Teresa Johnson
PR optimization/53743
Oleg Endo wrote:
> This fixes the issues of PR 54988.
> Tested on rev 192482 with
> make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim
> \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}"
>
> and no new failures.
OK.
Regards,
kaz
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:27 AM
> To: Bin Cheng
> Cc: 'Jakub Jelinek'; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH GCC]Fix test case failure reported in PR54989
>
> On 10/26/2012 10:14 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> > Act
I get a clean build on my end... no stdarg.h issues. Build
characteristics are given in the previous email.
On 10/29/2012 4:26 PM, rbmj wrote:
The build does eventually die in libstdc++-v3, but that's not due to
these changes (it gives me an internal compiler error while compiling
complex_io.c
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>> On 12-10-29 12:21 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>>
>>> Vladimir Makarov writes:
H.J. in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
reported a
On Oct 26, 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 2012-10-26 Jakub Jelinek
> PR debug/54953
> * valtrack.h (DEBUG_TEMP_AFTER_WITH_REG_FORCE): New.
> * valtrack.c (dead_debug_insert_temp): Use emit_debug_insn_after
> even for where == DEBUG_TEMP_AFTER_WITH_REG_FORCE.
> * dc
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> On 12-10-29 12:21 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>> Vladimir Makarov writes:
>>>
>>> H.J. in
>>>
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
>>>
>>> reported an interesting address
>>>
>>> (and:DI (subreg:DI (plus:SI (a
On 29 October 2012 21:26, Jason Merrill wrote:
> OK.
Thanks, committed.
Hello,
This fixes the issues of PR 54988.
Tested on rev 192482 with
make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim
\{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}"
and no new failures.
Cheers,
Oleg
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/54988
* config/sh/sh.md (tstqi_t_zero)
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> On 12-10-29 12:21 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>> Vladimir Makarov writes:
>>>
>>> H.J. in
>>>
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
>>>
>>> reported an interesting address
>>>
>>> (and:DI (subreg:DI (plus:SI (a
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:44 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This patch changes get_elimination to check register number instead of
>>> RTX. Tested on Linux/x32 with -maddress-mode=long. OK to install?
>>
>>
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch changes get_elimination to check register number instead of
>> RTX. Tested on Linux/x32 with -maddress-mode=long. OK to install?
>
> FWIW, this doesn't sound right to me, at least not without m
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> The following patch should fix the var-tracking slowness on the
> reflect/check testcases where one of the test routines was compiling for
> almost 50 minutes. The problem was that there is a huge routine that is
> shrink wrapped (or perha
Yeah, I looked into the testcase. Indeed, the expr location should be
used instead of curr_insn_location(). Otherwise the source line for
all definitions will be attributed to the use point. But if we use
EXPR_LOCATION, then we need to make sure the block is also correct.
Any suggestions how we sh
PR libstdc++/55123
* include/bits/shared_ptr_base.h (__shared_count::_S_create_from_up):
Do not instantiate allocator with element_type.
* testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/cons/55123.cc: New.
Tested x86-64-linux, committed to trunk and 4.7
commit 3a994d1a811d62cd87a3e97
måndag 29 oktober 2012 18.56.42 skrev Jakub Jelinek:
> Status
> ==
>
> I'd like to close the stage 1 phase of GCC 4.8 development
> on Monday, November 5th. If you have still patches for new features you'd
> like to see in GCC 4.8, please post them for review soon. Patches
> posted before t
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> On 12-10-28 11:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> Hi Vladimir,
>>
>> There are many trialling white spaces in LRA codes. This patch removes
>> them.
>
> Thank you for pointing this out. I should be more careful with emacs macros
> using TAB. I
OK.
Jason
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 09:46:24PM +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Will you also add the test case?
There already is, libgo make reflect/check. I don't see what other kind of
testcase should I provide for that, unless you mean scanning -dA assembly
for DW_OP_fbreg (which would be inherently targe
Ping - can I get this reviewed before stage 1 ends?
On 21 October 2012 22:25, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> The C++ bits look good to my casual non-maintainer eyes. Let's CC
> Jason.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jonathan Wakely a écrit:
>
>> This adds a warning switch for the existing "returning address of
>> lo
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 01:40:35PM -0700, Dehao Chen wrote:
> Attached is the new patch. This patch bootstrapped and passed all
> tests except the following:
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479.c -O1 line 13 h == 9
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479.c -O1 line 18 h == 9
> FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:43 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> The following patch should fix the var-tracking slowness on the
> reflect/check testcases where one of the test routines was compiling for
> almost 50 minutes.
Thanks for working on this.
Will you also add the test case?
Ciao!
Steven
Hi!
The following patch should fix the var-tracking slowness on the
reflect/check testcases where one of the test routines was compiling for
almost 50 minutes. The problem was that there is a huge routine that is
shrink wrapped (or perhaps just the split stack prologue is multi-bb),
and I was try
Committed as obvious.
Hi,
Attached is the new patch. This patch bootstrapped and passed all
tests except the following:
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479.c -O1 line 13 h == 9
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479.c -O1 line 18 h == 9
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479.c -O2 line 13 h == 9
FAIL: gcc.dg/guality/pr43479.c -O2 line 1
ping**2
2012/10/16 Janus Weil :
> ping!
>
>
> 2012/10/11 Janus Weil :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> here is an OOP patch for the above PR, which has two disconnected parts:
>>
>> 1) It fixes a problem with ASSOCIATED, when it is fed a CLASS-valued
>> function as argument (i.e. the ICE in the bug title). This
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Just to make sure. Testing on ppc should be fast, for example.
And useless. Your patch does not touch ppc.
Diego.
ping!
2012/10/22 Janus Weil :
> Minor update to the patch: It now also sets TREE_USED for entry
> masters in order to avoid bogus warnings for procedures with ENTRY
> (cf. comment 6 in the PR, which like comment 0 is a 4.8 regression).
>
> Still regtests cleanly. Ok?
>
> Cheers,
> Janus
>
>
>
> 2
On 29 October 2012 02:18, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> The code changes seem fine, but I don't think a testcase should depend on
> the details of what system strings.h declares (or even that it exists)
> like that. If you want a system header declaration, add a header to the
> testsuite that uses #pr
On 10/29/2012 12:53 PM, Bruce Korb wrote:
The first two patches I've applied. The remaining two are needed to fully
enable building the VxWorks flavor of GCC, but those bits affect parts
outside of fixincludes and there is some breakage somewhere.
All evidence seems to me to show fixincludes sti
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Sure. But the point is not to add more. We should mechanically strip
> all the #if 0 code from the tree, btw. No point keeping all that
> garbage around.
Please no. A lot (if not most) if the #if 0 code serves as good
documentation for wh
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> Hi David,
> This is the last of my vendetta against the "o" constraint in the
> rs6000 backend. Remaining are a few places in rs6000.md where the
> operand predicate is offsettable_mem_operand, and one instance in
> spe.md. I believe none of th
On 10/29/12, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Oct 29, 2012 Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > The sbitmap popcount function is only used in ebitmap, which is
> > itself not used. If we do anything, removing them might be the
> > thing to do.
>
> Yes, please.
Separate patch, please.
> > The bitmap.h iterators
On 10/27/12, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2012, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > 2012-10-26 Lawrence Crowl
> missing '>'
Fixed.
> > * is-a.h: New.
> > (is_a (U*)): New. Test for is-a relationship.
> > (as_a (U*)): New. Treat as a derived type.
> > (dyn_cast (U*)): New. C
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> Okay, but I point out that there is an awful lot of #if 0 code
> out there. I would rather have done such removal in a followup
> patch.
Sure. But the point is not to add more. We should mechanically strip
all the #if 0 code from the tr
Ok. I'll test Micheal's patch, and send out the new patch soon.
Thanks,
Dehao
On 10/29/12, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Oct 29, 2012 Diego Novillo wrote:
> > On Oct 25, 2012 Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > > The sbitmap non-bool returning bitwise operations have been
> > > merged with the bool versions. Sometimes this merge involved
> > > modifying the non-bool version to comput
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:40 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:33:33 -0400 (EDT)
>
>> From: Ian Lance Taylor
>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:31:33 -0700
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon,
From: David Miller
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:33:33 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Ian Lance Taylor
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:31:33 -0700
>
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Ian Lance Taylor
>>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
>>>
I changed it from vec->base
From: Eric Botcazou
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 20:25:15 +0100
>> I'd like to get the Sparc cbcond stuff in (3 revisions posted) which
>> is waiting for Eric B. to do some Solaris specific work.
>>
>> I'd also like to enable LRA for at least 32-bit sparc, even if I can't
>> find the time to work on a
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:31:33 -0700
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Ian Lance Taylor
>> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
>>
>>> I changed it from vec->base + vec->size. Now it is vec->base
>>> + size, where size is the aligned vers
What was supposed to be a simple fix, turned out to be a nightmare...
I am working on adding an uninstrumented code path for TM, in
expectation of hardware TM. This means that we eventually want to
generate something like this:
prop = _ITM_beginTransaction(PR_multiwayCode);
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ian Lance Taylor
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
>
>> I changed it from vec->base + vec->size. Now it is vec->base
>> + size, where size is the aligned version of vec->size.
>
> It is not.
>
> You don't modify 'size' at all.
> I'd like to get the Sparc cbcond stuff in (3 revisions posted) which
> is waiting for Eric B. to do some Solaris specific work.
>
> I'd also like to enable LRA for at least 32-bit sparc, even if I can't
> find the time to work on auditing 64-bit completely.
End of stage #1 isn't a hard limit fo
On 10/26/2012 10:14 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
Actually I am going to submit a patch monitoring the change of register
pressure accurately as we discussed before. With that patch, expressions
will be hoisted anyway if it can decrease register pressure thus this test
case won't fail anymore. So I am won
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
> I changed it from vec->base + vec->size. Now it is vec->base
> + size, where size is the aligned version of vec->size.
It is not.
You don't modify 'size' at all.
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:13:19 -0700
> Sure, if you can confirm that this patch fails, I will take another look.
It fails.
Same problem, SIGBUS.
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:03 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ian Lance Taylor
> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:43:42 -0700
>
>> This patch should fix it. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace testsuite
>> on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
>
> I can tell just by looking at your patch t
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> Hi, Micheal,
>
> Thanks for explaining the design principle of debug info with gimple,
> now I can understand your concerns. And thanks for providing the
> patch.
>
> However, in some places after gimplification (e.g. tree-inline.c), we
> still
> Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, will commit it shortly.
>
> Honza
>
> * gcc.dg/ipa/inline-6.c: New testcase.
> * ipa-inline.c (want_inline_function_called_once_p): Rename to ...
> (want_inline_function_to_all_callers_p): check also functions with
> multiple callers.
From: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:56:42 +0100
> I'd like to close the stage 1 phase of GCC 4.8 development
> on Monday, November 5th. If you have still patches for new features you'd
> like to see in GCC 4.8, please post them for review soon. Patches
> posted before the freeze, but
From: Ian Lance Taylor
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:43:42 -0700
> This patch should fix it. Bootstrapped and ran libbacktrace testsuite
> on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
I can tell just by looking at your patch that it doesn't fix the
problem.
It's "vec->base + vec->size" tha
Status
==
I'd like to close the stage 1 phase of GCC 4.8 development
on Monday, November 5th. If you have still patches for new features you'd
like to see in GCC 4.8, please post them for review soon. Patches
posted before the freeze, but reviewed shortly after the freeze, may
still go in, f
> > ICK ...
> >
> > Why not sth as simple as
> >
> > return num_ssa_operands (stmt, SSA_OP_USE);
> >
> > ? a[1][2] and b[2] really have the same cost, variable length
> > objects have extra SSA operands in ARRAY_REF/COMPONENT_REF for
> > the size. Thus, stmt cost somehow should reflect th
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:55 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Index: gcc/cgraph.c
>> ===
>> --- gcc/cgraph.c (revision 192623)
>> +++ gcc/cgraph.c (working copy)
>> @@ -132,6 +132,74 @@ static GTY(()) struct cgraph_edge *free_edges
On 12-10-29 12:21 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Vladimir Makarov writes:
>>H.J. in
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
>>
>>reported an interesting address
>>
>>> (and:DI (subreg:DI (plus:SI (ashift:SI (reg:SI 96 [ glob_vol_int.22 ])
>> (const_int 2 [0
On Oct 29, 2012, at 2:02 AM, Paul Richard Thomas
wrote:
> It looks straightforward to me but I am not convinced that a fortran
> maintainer should be giving the green light on this :-)
Well, seems reasonable to me as well… I'd let Diego or Jason approve it. :-)
Hi, Micheal,
Thanks for explaining the design principle of debug info with gimple,
now I can understand your concerns. And thanks for providing the
patch.
However, in some places after gimplification (e.g. tree-inline.c), we
still updates the block/location info. And EXPR_LOCATION is still used
w
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> Committed on trunk now. Sorry for the breakage, my build was incremental
> and missed this missing part.
Great. Thanks for the quick fix!
Diego.
The first two patches I've applied. The remaining two are needed to fully
enable building the VxWorks flavor of GCC, but those bits affect parts
outside of fixincludes and there is some breakage somewhere.
All evidence seems to me to show fixincludes still doing its thing correctly,
but somewhere
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
> Well, you merely moved the bogus code to gimple-low.c. It is
Hello!
Since we use simplify_gen_subreg on address part, we can use it for
DImode subreg of SImode address as well. simplify_gen_subreg knows how
to strip subreg.
2012-10-29 Uros Bizjak
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_decompose_address): Use simplify_gen_subreg
for all addresses, z
On 12-10-29 12:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Sorry, forgot a line:
i.e. please use SUBREG_REG rather than XEXP.
I've just fixed it.
On 12-10-29 12:21 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Vladimir Makarov writes:
H.J. in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
reported an interesting address
(and:DI (subreg:DI (plus:SI (ashift:SI (reg:SI 96 [ glob_vol_int.22 ])
(const_int 2 [0x2]))
Hi,
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Dehao Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> >> > Well, you merely moved the bogus code to gimple-low.c. It is bogus
> >> > because you unconditionally overwrite TREE_BLOCK of a
> ICK ...
>
> Why not sth as simple as
>
> return num_ssa_operands (stmt, SSA_OP_USE);
>
> ? a[1][2] and b[2] really have the same cost, variable length
> objects have extra SSA operands in ARRAY_REF/COMPONENT_REF for
> the size. Thus, stmt cost somehow should reflect the number
> of depe
Sorry, forgot a line:
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Vladimir Makarov writes:
>> Index: rtlanal.c
>> ===
>> --- rtlanal.c (revision 192942)
>> +++ rtlanal.c (working copy)
>> @@ -5459,6 +5459,11 @@ strip_address_mutations (rtx *loc
> Testing the patch below, will commit if success.
>
> 2012-10-29 Arnaud Charlet
>
>* gcc-interface/Makefile.in (s-oscons.ads): Adjust call to
>xoscons.
Committed on trunk now. Sorry for the breakage, my build was incremental
and missed this missing part.
Arno
Vladimir Makarov writes:
>H.J. in
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
>
>reported an interesting address
>
> (and:DI (subreg:DI (plus:SI (ashift:SI (reg:SI 96 [ glob_vol_int.22 ])
> (const_int 2 [0x2]))
> (symbol_ref:SI ("glob_vol_int_arr")
> > We chatted about this on IRC, and Richi is seeing the same problem on
> > his builds.
>
> Very strange. I'm looking at it.
OK, this comes from code duplicated between gcc-interface/Makefile.in and
Make-generated.in, pretty messy.
Testing the patch below, will commit if success.
2012-10-29
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>> > Well, you merely moved the bogus code to gimple-low.c. It is bogus
>>> > because you unconditionally overwrite TREE_BLOCK of
H.J. in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55116
reported an interesting address
(and:DI (subreg:DI (plus:SI (ashift:SI (reg:SI 96 [ glob_vol_int.22 ])
(const_int 2 [0x2]))
(symbol_ref:SI ("glob_vol_int_arr") 0x703c2720 glob_vol_int_arr>)) 0)
(c
Ping ^ 3.
On 10/18/2012 10:30 AM, Meador Inge wrote:
> Ping ^ 2.
>
> On 10/09/2012 09:44 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
>> Ping.
>>
>> On 10/04/2012 03:45 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Currently the gcc-{ar,nm,ranlib} utilities assume that binutils is in
>>> path when invoking the wrapped bi
Hi,
this patch updates inlining functions called once into inlining functions
called multiple times when the overall unit size for inlining everywhere
shriks. This is now quite possible in the cases where inline predicates catch
some DCE as seen in the silly testcase attached. We already caught mo
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 10:12 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller
> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 00:31:27 -0400 (EDT)
>
>> The size is 24, and my patch definitely makes the crashes go away.
>>
>> It seems like a vector is being used for a mixed set of objects.
>> I'll try to figure out how tha
On Oct 26, 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 04:30:41AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> From: Alexandre Oliva
Fixed .git/config and the patches to use my @redhat.com address for
these patches.
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/guality/pr54693.c
> The #include looks useless t
> I have no directory called gcc/ada/bldtools/oscons/xoscons. That's an
> executable.
Yes, that's as expected, I asked you to check the timestamp of this file.
> Still happens with -j1 (after starting from scratch), so it's probably
> not a parallel make issue.
Right, no surprise here.
> We ch
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> > Well, you merely moved the bogus code to gimple-low.c. It is bogus
>> > because you unconditionally overwrite TREE_BLOCK of all operands (and all
Emm, then in gimple-low.c, we should
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> Yup, it does:
>
> OK then can you check the timestamp of ./gcc/ada/bldtools/oscons/xoscons
> vs e.g. ./gcc/ada/bldtools/oscons/xoscons/xoscons.adb and
> $(srcdir)/gcc/ada/xoscons.adb?
I have no directory called gcc/ada/bldtools/oscons/xos
Uros Bizjak writes:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 2:37 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
As suggested by Richard S. [1], after the patch that converts subreg:M
(op:N (...)(...)) to op:M (subreg:M (...) subreg:M (...)), we can
remove several peephole2 patterns that handle subregs of PLUS, MINUS
"H.J. Lu" writes:
> Hi,
>
> This patch changes get_elimination to check register number instead of
> RTX. Tested on Linux/x32 with -maddress-mode=long. OK to install?
FWIW, this doesn't sound right to me, at least not without more justification.
The idea is that things like frame_pointer_rtx ar
> > {
> > tree rhs = gimple_assign_rhs1 (stmt);
> > @@ -1584,6 +1585,20 @@ eliminated_by_inlining_prob (gimple stmt
> > /* Reads of parameter are expected to be free. */
> > if (unmodified_parm (stmt, inner_rhs))
> > rhs_free = true;
> >
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 03:11:29PM +0200, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
> > > * asan.c (insert_if_then_before_iter)
> > > (instrument_mem_region_access)
> > > (maybe_instrument_builtin_call, maybe_instrument_call): New static
> >
> Yup, it does:
OK then can you check the timestamp of ./gcc/ada/bldtools/oscons/xoscons
vs e.g. ./gcc/ada/bldtools/oscons/xoscons/xoscons.adb and
$(srcdir)/gcc/ada/xoscons.adb?
Arno
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>>> >> Well, this was a build from scratch. Maybe there is a parallel make
>>> >> bug in the new ada changes? Some undeclared dependency?
>>> >
>>> > There is not in the recent chang
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> >> Well, this was a build from scratch. Maybe there is a parallel make
>> >> bug in the new ada changes? Some undeclared dependency?
>> >
>> > There is not in the recent changes. Maybe there's a latent bug, although I
>> > have never exp
On 12-10-28 11:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
Hi Vladimir,
There are many trialling white spaces in LRA codes. This patch removes
them.
Thank you for pointing this out. I should be more careful with emacs
macros using TAB. It would be nice if you install the patch.
On 12-10-29 9:06 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
Hi,
This patch changes get_elimination to check register number instead of
RTX. Tested on Linux/x32 with -maddress-mode=long. OK to install?
Yes. Thanks, H.J.
On 12-10-28 8:49 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch fixes PR55106. A value in GENERAL_REGS is inherited
into a move with destination pseudo of SSE_REGS. It results into secondary
move for which inheritance is tried again an again
> >> Well, this was a build from scratch. Maybe there is a parallel make
> >> bug in the new ada changes? Some undeclared dependency?
> >
> > There is not in the recent changes. Maybe there's a latent bug, although I
> > have never experienced it.
> >
> > At which revision are you?
>
> rev 19294
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> Well, this was a build from scratch. Maybe there is a parallel make
>> bug in the new ada changes? Some undeclared dependency?
>
> There is not in the recent changes. Maybe there's a latent bug, although I
> have never experienced it.
>
> Well, this was a build from scratch. Maybe there is a parallel make
> bug in the new ada changes? Some undeclared dependency?
There is not in the recent changes. Maybe there's a latent bug, although I
have never experienced it.
At which revision are you?
Arno
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
>> After updating my tree to rev 192942 this morning, I'm getting a
>> bootstrap failure with ada enabled:
>
> Looks like make did not rebuild (or too late?) xoscons.
>
> I'd suggest doing a rm -rf gcc/ada/bldtools from your obj directory and
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets some predicates on floating point constants answer true for
vectors, so optimizations are applied.
Tested bootstrap + testsuite (default languages).
Ok. Bonus points if yo
> After updating my tree to rev 192942 this morning, I'm getting a
> bootstrap failure with ada enabled:
Looks like make did not rebuild (or too late?) xoscons.
I'd suggest doing a rm -rf gcc/ada/bldtools from your obj directory and
see if this fixes the error.
If not, you might need to do a mak
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
