"Steve Ellcey " writes:
> I noticed that because my new mips-mti-elf target includes config/mt-sde
> it uses the -Os option by default when building runtime libraries. I would
> like to remove the use of -Os so that the runtime performance for the
> mips-mti-elf target is improved. If users want
Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the patch and valuable comments.
>> The output constraint is now an in-out: s/=Q/+Q/.
Done.
Please find attached the modified patch and let me know if it's okay?
Thanks & Regards,
Naveen
rx_bit_insn.patch
Description: rx_bit_insn.patch
I tested changes with configure
../gcc/configure --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib
--enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld --with-fpmath=sse
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,java,lto,objc --with-arch=corei7-avx
--with-cpu=corei7-avx
Bootstrap is passed and no new fails in make check.
Thank
From: Steven Bosscher
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 01:19:11 +0100
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> One idea that occurred to me was perhaps to extend
>> define_register_constraint such that an extra condition can be
>> specified. So for sparc's constraint "U" it would evaluate
On 11/08/2012 02:37 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Bah, it's nothing to do with me, the profile-mode list should never
have worked! I'm testing this overnight.
Ah! Thanks!
Paolo.
[...]
> > 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 datastructures for multilibs, as output by
On 7 November 2012 10:55, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 7 November 2012 10:25, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>>
>> I'm for example seeing in the log:
>>
>> 23_containers/list/init-list.cc execution test
>>
>> pretty mysterious,
>
> Yes, I had a quick look at it but couldn't see the problem, so wanted
> to
On 7 November 2012 22:02, François Dumont wrote:
>
> Ok to commit ? If so, where ?
That patch is OK for trunk and 4.7, thanks.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
> One idea that occurred to me was perhaps to extend
> define_register_constraint such that an extra condition can be
> specified. So for sparc's constraint "U" it would evaluate to
> GENERAL_REGS but also express the condition that the hard reg
Quoting Joern Rennecke :
+ varying_length[uid] = (varying_length[inner_uid] & 1);
Typo; I meant:
+ varying_length[uid] |= (varying_length[inner_uid] & 1);
I noticed that because my new mips-mti-elf target includes config/mt-sde
it uses the -Os option by default when building runtime libraries. I would
like to remove the use of -Os so that the runtime performance for the
mips-mti-elf target is improved. If users want the -Os flag they can use
the ex
Richard Henderson writes:
>
> Is it ever likely that we'd choose an uninstrumented path for a
> nested transaction, given that we're already executing the instrumented
> path for an outer transaction?
I don't see why not. A small inner transaction may well succeed
in HTM, even if the big outer o
On 12-11-07 5:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
Vlad, I wanted to make you aware of the following because it's
a major barrier for using LRA on sparc at this time. I therefore
do not think moving to LRA on this target is possible in the 4.8
timeframe, which is fine. The situation is described complete
On 11/07/2012 03:01 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Thoughts?
Now with 100% more patches per mail!
r~
>From 6e97eb1f7086b4392545cc73254037cd3ff09fe6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Richard Henderson
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:32:21 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] tm: Handle nested transactions in
ipa_
I wrote the second of these patches first, and I'm uncertain about the
desirability of the first of the patches.
While working on the uninstrumented code path bulk patch, I noticed that
nested transactions within the copy of the outermost transaction were
not being processed for an uninstrumented
On 12-11-07 5:27 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch adds omitted target for the test. The test was
supposed to run on x86-64 only. On 32-bit x86, it should fail. Reload
fails on this test on x86 too although with an error message
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Attached patch addresses UNRESOLVED part of cunroll-1.c test failure,
> but with fixed dump filename, I got:
>
> FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/cunroll-1.c scan-tree-dump cunrolli "Unrolled
> loop 1 completely .duplicated 1 times.."
Now committed as ob
Vlad, I wanted to make you aware of the following because it's
a major barrier for using LRA on sparc at this time. I therefore
do not think moving to LRA on this target is possible in the 4.8
timeframe, which is fine. The situation is described completely
in the comment I am adding in the patch
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> The patch simply removes the call to emit_block_move, while still
> calling copy_blkmode_from_reg when appropriate. The patch fixes the
> testsuite failure and produces the same code as gcc-4.7.
>
> 2012-11-07 Uros Bizjak
>
> PR mid
(fold_binary_op_with_conditional_arg): Do not fold if
the argument is itself a conditional expression.
2012-11-07 Eric Botcazou
* gcc.c-torture/compile/20121107-1.c: New test.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: fold-const.c
===
--- fold-const.c
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch adds omitted target for the test. The test was
> supposed to run on x86-64 only. On 32-bit x86, it should fail. Reload
> fails on this test on x86 too although with an error message. I am going to
> add a generatio
The following patch adds omitted target for the test. The test was
supposed to run on x86-64 only. On 32-bit x86, it should fail. Reload
fails on this test on x86 too although with an error message. I am
going to add a generation of a message too.
Committed as rev. 193311.
2012-11-07
The following patch fixes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55122
The problem was in generation of reload pseudo for matching operands
with uniq value which prevented to assign the same hard register for the
reload pseudo and the original input pseudo when the choice of hard regs
Hello!
Attached patch fixes an oversight, introduced in Revision 192641 [1]
that caused following testsuite failure on i686:
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr44948-2a.c (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/pr44948-2a.c (test for excess errors)
As shown in the PR [2], the referred patch activat
Here is the patch to fix the redundant rehash/reserve issue.
2012-11-07 François Dumont
PR libstdc++/54075
* include/bits/hashtable.h (_Hashtable<>::rehash): Reset hash
policy state if no rehash.
* testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/modifiers/reserve.cc
(test02): New.
Ping ^ 4.
On 10/29/2012 10:46 AM, Meador Inge wrote:
> 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} utilit
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> Sure. What about something like this?
>
> Index: htdocs/index.html
> ===
> RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/index.html,v
> retrieving revision 1.865
> diff -u -r1.865 index.html
> --- htdo
When I patched Aldy's code to perform the update_ssa explicitly,
I forgot to take out the TODO_update_ssa that Aldy had added.
Tested on x86_64-linux and committed.
r~
* trans-mem.c (pass_ipa_tm): Don't use TODO_update_ssa.
diff --git a/gcc/trans-mem.c b/gcc/trans-mem.c
index 642e088..
On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 10:35 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > * doc/invoke.texi (-mcpu=power8): Document.
> > * config.in (HAVE_AS_POWER8): New.
> > * config.gcc: Add cpu_type power8.
> > * configure.ac: (HAVE_AS_POWER8): Check for assembler support for
> > the
> >
Hello!
Apparently, vzeroupper patch removed a couple of unrelated lines.
Attached patch puts back what was there in gcc-4.5.
(Also, the patch finds a better place for check_avx256_stores.)
2012-11-07 Uros Bizjak
PR target/55224
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_function_ok_for_sibca
See some random comments below. Some test cases should also be added.
It should be easy to fake the attack by using placement new with
incompatible type ..
David
> /* Start the process of running a particular set of global constructors
> or destructors. Subroutine of do_[cd]tors. */
>
>
On 2012-11-07 00:51, Naveen H. S wrote:
> + [(set (match_operand:QI 0 "rx_restricted_mem_operand" "=Q")
> + (ior:QI (match_dup 0)
The output constraint is now an in-out: s/=Q/+Q/.
r~
ok for google branches.
David
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Harshit Chopra wrote:
> Yes, will do, but probably not so soon. Once I have some spare time to
> prepare my case for this being useful to public.
>
> Meanwhile, this patch is just for google-main and then I will port it
> to google_4-
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 10:22:57AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >I thought about that. We'd need some machinery that would allow cpp to
> >query what has been declared already.
>
> Or alternately, always treat them as user-defined in C++ mode and
> have the front end decide to use the built-in
On 11/06/2012 05:20 PM, 3dw...@verizon.net wrote:
So how about
-f[no-]ext-numeric-literals
Sure.
I think the ideal behavior for these suffixes would be to treat them as
user-defined literals if a corresponding literal operator is available,
or use the built-in extension if not. But that do
Hello,
Thanyou for investigation and fixing the problem. I'll answer on remarks later.
Regards,
Vladimir
2012/11/7 Jakub Jelinek :
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 02:11:50PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Kirill Yukhin
>> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >> OK for mainline SVN, pleas
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>
> As asan/tsan functionality is getting into trunk, we need to set up
> testings as soon as possible to avoid bitrot.
>
> Kostya can probably shed some lights on the test case requirements,
> and we can continue discussions on how to exten
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 03:39:15PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > another bootstrap finishes. I'm not sure if it would be OK to commit
> > it now, given it is stage3, though. OTOH, I think it would be worth
> > it.
>
> I'm ok with getting that in now from RM POV, but not familiar with the
> c
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 03:39:15PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> another bootstrap finishes. I'm not sure if it would be OK to commit
> it now, given it is stage3, though. OTOH, I think it would be worth
> it.
I'm ok with getting that in now from RM POV, but not familiar with the
code enough to
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 02:35:30PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 12:58:07AM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > 2012-11-05 Martin Jambor
> >
> > PR tree-optimization/53787
> > * ipa-cp.c (ipcp_value_source): New field offset.
> ...
>
> Is this supposed to do somethi
>
> > OK,
> > is bb1 going to die? If not, probably bb1->count = 0 should be there, if
> > so,
> > then the bb1->frequency = 0 is redundant.
>
> Agree, we do 'delete_basic_block (bb1)' and the frequency is not used in
> between, so the setting to 0 seems unnecessary.
>
> testing it:
>
> Index
AIX has the exact same problem. Thanks for tracking down the solution
on Darwin. I applied the equivalent testsuite option for AIX.
Thanks, David
* testsuite/libgomp.c++/pr24455.C: Use -Wl,-G on AIX.
--- a/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.c++/pr24455.C 2012-06-18
17:57:13.0 -0400
Gerald Pfeifer writes:
> Just a small note, in the following
>
> +#ifdef __FreeBSD__
> +# define DEFAULT_PROCESS_FILENAME "/proc/curproc/file"
> +#elif defined(HAVE_GETEXECNAME)
> +# define DEFAULT_PROCESS_FILENAME getexecname ()
> +#else
> +# define DEFAULT_PROCESS_FILENAME "/proc/se
Hi!
The first (C++) testcase is rejected since my SIZEOF_EXPR folding deferral
changes, the problem is that
-1 + (int) (sizeof (int) - 1)
is first changed into
-1 + (int) ((unsigned) sizeof (int) + UINT_MAX)
and then fold_binary_loc reassociates it in int type into
(int) sizeof (int) + [-2(overflo
> OK,
> is bb1 going to die? If not, probably bb1->count = 0 should be there, if so,
> then the bb1->frequency = 0 is redundant.
Agree, we do 'delete_basic_block (bb1)' and the frequency is not used in
between, so the setting to 0 seems unnecessary.
testing it:
Index: tree-ssa-tail-merge.c
===
Hello!
Attached patch addresses UNRESOLVED part of cunroll-1.c test failure,
but with fixed dump filename, I got:
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/cunroll-1.c scan-tree-dump cunrolli "Unrolled
loop 1 completely .duplicated 1 times.."
I'll leave this to Honza to decide.
Uros.
Index: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/cunrol
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Or I wonder why is call handled specially at all, doesn't
> /* Check if a 256bit AVX register is referenced in stores. */
> state = unused;
> note_stores (pat, check_avx256_stores, &state);
> if (state == used)
> return AVX_U128_
> There are four in-tree target architectures that already use %|. I think
> it would be better if you made these new escapes target-specific.
Escaped curly braces cannot be target-specific since
do_assembler_dialects() in final.c ignores any % and considers '{' and
'}' to be alternative delimete
> Hello,
>
> This tiny patch fixes the issue previously discussed in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00794.html
>
> Not maintaining bb->count while merging basic blocs results in wrong
> partitioning (and surely other) decisions. This is visible on the SH4
> with shrink-wrapping. I
Hello,
This tiny patch fixes the issue previously discussed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00794.html
Not maintaining bb->count while merging basic blocs results in wrong
partitioning (and surely other) decisions. This is visible on the SH4
with shrink-wrapping. I haven't noticed
On 10/23/2012 07:55 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
OK.
Unfortunately the patch as-is seems at least incomplete, thus to be sure
I reverted it for now and re-opened the PR: trying to actually use the
type showed issues in the gimplifier, see below. If you have hints about
that I would be glad to furt
On 7 November 2012 10:25, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 11/07/2012 10:18 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> On 6 November 2012 19:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6 November 2012 18:21, Paolo Carlini wrote:
testsuite/20_util/scoped_allocator/1.cc:79: void test02():
Asse
Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Please also add the testcase from the PR to the testsuite.
For the record, I've committed the testcase below from the PR.
Regards,
kaz
--
2012-11-07 Kaz Kojima
* gcc.c-torture/compile/pr49220.c: New test.
--- ORIG/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compil
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Hi,
> > with inliner predicates, the inliner heuristic now is able to prove that
> > some of the inlined function body will be optimized out after inlining.
> > This makes it possible to estimate the speedup that is now used to drive
> > the
Hi,
On 11/07/2012 10:18 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 6 November 2012 19:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 6 November 2012 18:21, Paolo Carlini wrote:
testsuite/20_util/scoped_allocator/1.cc:79: void test02(): Assertion
`evv[0].get_allocator().get_personality() == 2' failed.
I didn't really
Hi,
instead of writing again and again the same conditional, I'm finishing
testing the below, will install soon if everything goes well.
Thanks,
Paolo.
2012-11-07 Paolo Carlini
* include/debug/array (_GLIBCXX_THROW_OR_ABORT): Move...
* include/bits/c++
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> 2012-11-07 Kaz Kojima
>>
>> PR middle-end/49220
>> * mode-switching.c (create_pre_exit): Set short_block if there
>> are no copy insns.
>
> OK, but clearly a rewrite of the function would be in order.
Please also add th
> 2012-11-07 Kaz Kojima
>
> PR middle-end/49220
> * mode-switching.c (create_pre_exit): Set short_block if there
> are no copy insns.
OK, but clearly a rewrite of the function would be in order.
--
Eric Botcazou
> expand_assignment calls:
>
>if (MEM_P (to_rtx))
> {
>/* If the field is at offset zero, we could have been given
> the DECL_RTX of the parent struct. Don't munge it. */ to_rtx =
> shallow_copy_rtx (to_rtx);
>
>set_mem_attributes_minus_b
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> with inliner predicates, the inliner heuristic now is able to prove that
> some of the inlined function body will be optimized out after inlining.
> This makes it possible to estimate the speedup that is now used to drive
> the badness met
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:08:08AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> >> 2012-11-06 Jakub Jelinek
>> >>
>> >> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_avx_u128_mode_after): Don't
>> >> look for reg in CALL operand.
>> >
>> > OK.
>>
>> You can a
Hi,
with inliner predicates, the inliner heuristic now is able to prove that
some of the inlined function body will be optimized out after inlining.
This makes it possible to estimate the speedup that is now used to drive
the badness metric, but it is ignored in actual decision whether function
is
On 21/10/12 00:14, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>> the attached patch adds initial support for the latest release of
>> the IBM mainframe series - the IBM zEnterprise EC12 (zEC12).
>
> Nice. Can you please also add a note to the release notes at
> gcc-4.8/ch
Hi,
while analyzing c-ray I noticed two issues. First is that I originally set
number
of size/time entries to 32. Once we reach this limit we conservatively account
everything as unconditional. This limit is not met on relatively simple
testcases, like ray-sphere. The reason is that aggregate
Hi,
The attached is yet another create_pre_exit patch to fix
PR middle-end/49220 which is an ice-on-invalid-code. It's for
non-void function which returns without value. The patch is
tested with bootstrap and the top level "make -k check" on
i686-pc-linux-gnu with no new failures and regtested o
On 6 November 2012 19:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 6 November 2012 18:21, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>>
>> testsuite/20_util/scoped_allocator/1.cc:79: void test02(): Assertion
>> `evv[0].get_allocator().get_personality() == 2' failed.
>>
>> I didn't really investigate it...
>
> Oops, looks like I
> This should be fixed by a patch I committed directly before you
> sent your mail (which is why you did not see it yet). Can you
> please verify?
Bootstrap has completed at revision 193278 (with the patch for
dwarf2out.c.
Thanks,
Dominique
Hi,
Thank you for reviewing the patch and valuable comments.
>> You need to use match_dup instead of a matching constraint.
Done.
>> Every one that isn't explicitly invoked should have a leading "*"
>> in the name.
Done.
Please find attached the modified patch and let me know if it's okay?
Th
PR bootstrap/55211
Revert:
* config/sparc/constraints.md ("U"): Delete.
* config/sparc/sparc.md: Use 'r' constraint instead of 'U'.
* config/sparc/sync.md: Likewise.
And revert parts of:
* doc/md.texi: Sync sparc constraint documentation with
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:08:08AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> >> 2012-11-06 Jakub Jelinek
> >>
> >> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_avx_u128_mode_after): Don't
> >> look for reg in CALL operand.
> >
> > OK.
>
> You can also break the loop after reg is found.
I have committed the pa
70 matches
Mail list logo
