On Sat, 25 May 2013, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Index: tree-ssa-structalias.c
===
--- tree-ssa-structalias.c (revision 199289)
+++ tree-ssa-structalias.c (working copy)
@@ -475,21 +475,21 @@ struct constraint_expr
/* Off
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 08:26:32PM -0700, Benjamin De Kosnik wrote:
> It scraps the renaming/aliasing approach, and just creates a
> compatibility-chrono.cc that mimics the default configuration in 4.8.0.
Yeah, I think that is reasonable, with one nit, see below.
> Users who specially-configured
[gcc/testsuite]
2013-05-20 Michael Meissner
* gcc.target/powerpc/crypto-builtin-1.c: New file, test for power8
crypto builtins.
The testcase needs to check something more than
/* { dg-require-effective-target powerpc_vsx_ok } */
I don't know if we need to separate the new VSX
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Michael Meissner
wrote:
> * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_option_override_internal): Only
> allow power8 quad mode in 64-bit. Turn off splitting wide types
> if we have quad mode.
Completely turning off splitting wide types seems like a
> So, there is a minor issue that what is std::chrono::steady_clock has
> changed, if you say use it as a function parameter, it will mangle
> differently before/after. Guess not that big a deal, after all, C++11
> support is still experimental, right?
Right, ditto, yes.
> But the more importa
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Sharad Singhai wrote:
>if (flag_gcov_file)
> {
> - char *gcov_file_name
> -= make_gcov_file_name (file_name, src->coverage.name);
> + if (flag_intermediate_format)
> +/* Output the intermediate format without requiring source
> +
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Rong Xu wrote:
> This patch fixes a bug in exposed in LIPO build (ICE in copy tree node).
>
> Tested with bookstrap and google internal benchmarks.
>
> -Rong
>
> 2013-05-24 Rong Xu
> Google ref b/8963414.
> * gcc/tree-inline.c (add_local_variable
On 24 May 2013 21:10, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> So, there is a minor issue that what is std::chrono::steady_clock has
> changed, if you say use it as a function parameter, it will mangle
> differently before/after. Guess not that big a deal, after all, C++11
> support is still experimental, right?
OK.
Jason
This patch fixes a bug in exposed in LIPO build (ICE in copy tree node).
Tested with bookstrap and google internal benchmarks.
-Rong
2013-05-24 Rong Xu
Google ref b/8963414.
* gcc/tree-inline.c (add_local_variables): Not map
to deleted debug expression.
Index: gcc/tre
Index: tree-ssa-structalias.c
===
--- tree-ssa-structalias.c (revision 199289)
+++ tree-ssa-structalias.c (working copy)
@@ -475,21 +475,21 @@ struct constraint_expr
/* Offset, in bits, of this constraint from the beginn
Hi,
This patch forward ports r175134 from google/gcc-4.7 into
google/gcc-4.8. The intermediate format is a bit simplified. I am also
planning to propose this for trunk in a separate message.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64. Okay for google/gcc-4_8?
Thanks,
Sharad
2013-05-24 Sharad Singhai
Benjamin De Kosnik writes:
>>> I get the
>> > following testsuite regressions on Solaris 10/x86:
>> >
>> > FAIL: 30_threads/async/54297.cc (test for excess errors)
>> > WARNING: 30_threads/async/54297.cc compilation failed to produce
>> > executable FAIL: 30_threads/condition_variable_any/53830.c
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>
> On 2013-02-25 14:27 , Caroline Tice wrote:
>
>> Index: libgcc/Makefile.in
>> ===
>> --- libgcc/Makefile.in(revision 196266)
>> +++ libgcc/Makefile.in(working copy)
>>
Hi,
this remained assigned to me way too much time. The story goes that we
used to ICE on parse/dtor6.C, then Mark fixed the ICE, and Volker opened
25666 as a purely diagnostic issue, that is about the lack of a terse
error message mentioning that templated destructors are illegal. Turns
out
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:34:31PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> PR debug/56950
> * haifa-sched.c (sched_extend_bb): Ignore DEBUG_INSNs.
Ok, thanks.
Jakub
Hello,
haifa-sched.c:sched_extend_bb inserts a note at the function end to
keep sched_info->next_tail non-NULL. But it fails to look around
DEBUG_INSNs, resulting in a compare-debug failure. Fixed with this
patch.
I'm not entirely happy with this patch because in sched1 we insert a
note between b
>> I get the
> > following testsuite regressions on Solaris 10/x86:
> >
> > FAIL: 30_threads/async/54297.cc (test for excess errors)
> > WARNING: 30_threads/async/54297.cc compilation failed to produce
> > executable FAIL: 30_threads/condition_variable_any/53830.cc (test
> > for excess errors) WARN
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:22:43PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 24 May 2013 16:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > So, adjusted patches attached, ok for trunk/4.8 if they pass
> > bootstrap/regtest?
>
> Yes, they're OK - thanks for sorting it out.
Note, I've already committed the patches, but
We do in fact set TYPE_STRUCTURAL_EQUALITY_P on TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARM,
so we can't assume it isn't set.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit affd3dcbcfeeda70db2413f19948dfd039ce0a0a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Fri May 24 13:52:31 2013 -0400
PR c++/56971
* pt.c (an
On May 24, 2013, at 12:02 AM, Alexander Ivchenko wrote:
> *ping*
>
> 2013/4/11 Alexander Ivchenko :
>> Hi,
>>
>> The same motivation as for:
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-03/msg00786.html
>>
>> "Since -fpic option is turned on by default in Android we have certain test
>> fails. The rea
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jakub Jelinek
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:03 PM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V
> Cc: Jeff Law; r...@redhat.com; Aldy Hernandez; 'Joseph S. Myers';
> 'gcc-patches'
> Subject: Re: [PI
Jonathan,
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov
wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Jonathan Wakely
> wrote:
>
>> I was wondering the other day whether we should put these checks on
>> trunk and enable them automatically when !defined(__OPTIMIZE__)
>
> FWIW, we keep this under
Hi,
a couple of tiny tweaks that should reduce a bit the risk of confusions
and subtle bugs (mostly suggested by Daniel, thanks!)
Thanks,
Paolo.
2013-05-24 Paolo Carlini
* include/ext/type_traits.h (__is_null_pointer): Add std::nullptr_t
overload.
On 2013-05-23 11:51 , Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
Greetings,
This patch adds (relatively) cheap bounds and dangling checks to
vector, similar to the checks I added to vector in r195373,
r195356, etc.
Ok for google branches (gcc-4_7, gcc-4_8, integration) ?
OK.
Diego.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:52:11PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> * gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/array_test1.c: New test.
...
> * gcc.dg/cilk-plus/AN/cilkplus_AN_c.exp: New script.
Ok, I guess I can live with /AN/ extra level, but can you please
move it still to c-c++-common/cilk-plus/AN/ for a
I'm ok inasmuch as the relevant tests are shared between c/c++.
"Iyer, Balaji V" wrote:
[I included Jeff Law also in this conversation]
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Aldy Hernandez
> Sent: Thursday, May
Hello Richard, et al.,
Attached please find a patch with the following changes:
1. Test-suite codes were moved to the appropriate location as suggested below
And the following modifications that RTH mentioned in
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01400.html)
2. ARRAY_NOTATION
In that case, if my insert_stmt immediately follows dep_stmt and both
have the same UID, not_dominated_by would return true and I will end
up updating insert_stmt to dep_stmt which is wrong.
- Easwaran
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Easw
OK.
Jason
Hi,
On 05/24/2013 06:12 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/24/2013 10:50 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ || ((TREE_CODE (type) == ENUMERAL_TYPE
+&& (tree_int_cst_lt
+(TYPE_SIZE (ENUM_UNDERLYING_TYPE (type)), w)))
+ || (TREE_CODE (type) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
+
On 05/21/2013 02:23 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
As I believe I pointed out in a follow-up message, 254.gap is depending on
signed overflow semantics.
This patch avoids eliminating a cast feeding a conditional when the
SSA_NAME's range has overflow
Please find attached the updated patch.
bootstrapped / regtested for i686-pc-linux-gnu
regtested for i686-pc-linux-gnu X sh-elf
regtested in gcc 4.8 branch for i686-pc-linux-gnu X avr
(--target-board atmega128-sim)
2013-05-24 Joern Rennecke
PR rtl-optimization/56833
* postrel
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 24 May 2013 16:20, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>> Updated patch attached to address the comments. I was not able to
>> figure out how to build the libstdc++ documentation to verify my doc
>> changes although I did run xmllint successfully.
>
>
Trying to send again; gcc_patches list bounced original message.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Caroline Tice
Date: Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH, updated] Vtable pointer verification, C++ front
end changes (patch 1 of 3)
To: Jason Merrill
Cc: Diego Novillo , Lu
On 05/23/2013 06:42 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
I got all your responses and, if I remove the compile, execute and
errors directories but keep cilk-plus and array notation, maybe even
abbreviate array notation to "an", (in future cilk keywords to "ck",
pragma simd to "ps" and elemental function t
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 23:51 +0800, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
> 2013/5/23 Jakub Jelinek :
> > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 08:30:35PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> >> The arrays of thresholds in gcc/bb-reorder.c appear not to have changed
> >> since 2004 (in r80564).
> >>
> >> As part of my hope of quashing glo
On 05/24/2013 10:50 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ || ((TREE_CODE (type) == ENUMERAL_TYPE
+ && (tree_int_cst_lt
+ (TYPE_SIZE (ENUM_UNDERLYING_TYPE (type)), w)))
+ || (TREE_CODE (type) == BOOLEAN_TYPE
+ && tree_
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> When FMA_EXPR was added to potential_constant_expression_1, it wasn't added
> to cxx_eval_constant_expression at the same time...
>
> Regression tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. David, can you
> verify that this fixes bootstra
2013/5/23 Jakub Jelinek :
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 08:30:35PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>> The arrays of thresholds in gcc/bb-reorder.c appear not to have changed
>> since 2004 (in r80564).
>>
>> As part of my hope of quashing global state in gcc, I'd like to mark
>> them as const.
>>
>> Bootstr
On 13-05-23 4:51 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Ping**2
Steven, sorry for the delay. The patch is ok. Thanks for better
documentation too. We need it as the scheduler is becoming more and
more complicated.
> I agree it is desirable, but is it enough to ensure that they will be only
> toplevel? Can't you e.g. do a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR from an integer type or
> floating/vector type etc. to struct type, then the verifier wouldn't
> discover there is VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR 32>>?
Sure, you can apply VIEW_CONVE
The following patch contains some changes needed for porting LRA to
rs6000 and s390.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 199298.
2013-05-24 Vladimir Makarov
* lra-constraints.c (emit_spill_move): Use smaller mode for
mem-mem moves.
2013/5/23 Chung-Ju Wu :
>
> The patch is revised accordingly as follows:
> - The tar files, including gmp/mpfr/mpc/isl/cloog, are left under directory.
> - In the shell script, we should use '=' as equality comparison operator.
>
> Thanks for the review comments and Paolo's approval.
> I will c
On 24 May 2013 16:20, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> Updated patch attached to address the comments. I was not able to
> figure out how to build the libstdc++ documentation to verify my doc
> changes although I did run xmllint successfully.
Did you see
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/docume
On 24 May 2013 16:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> So, adjusted patches attached, ok for trunk/4.8 if they pass
> bootstrap/regtest?
Yes, they're OK - thanks for sorting it out.
> > As things stand now, if "predicable" is set to "no" for a
> particular
> > alternative, the value of control_attr is irrelevant, that
> alternative
> > will never have a cond_exec version. In your scheme, however,
> > the presence of triggers the creation of
> cond_exec
> > variants for all of
> 2013-05-24 Martin Jambor
>
> * cgraph.h (ipa_record_stmt_references): Declare.
> * cgraphbuild.c (ipa_record_stmt_references): New function.
> (build_cgraph_edges): Use ipa_record_stmt_references.
> (rebuild_cgraph_edges): Likewise.
> (cgraph_rebuild_references):
Hi,
when modifying an indirectly recursively called function, IPA-SRA may
remove a statement for which we have already gathered references in
the symbol table and replace it with new statement(s), making the
symbol table information stale which can lead to problems like PR
57294.
The patch below
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 05:05:52PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > 2013-05-23 Martin Jambor
> >
> > * tree-cfg.c (verify_expr): Verify that BIT_FIELD_REFs, IMAGPART_EXPRs
> > and REALPART_EXPRs have scalar type.
>
> I cannot formally approve, but this looks the right test to me.
I agr
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> So, adjusted patches attached, ok for trunk/4.8 if they pass
> bootstrap/regtest? Guess Rainer will need to on top of that adjust
> Solaris baseline_symbols.txt files.
I meant to look into that, but usually I only update the baselines for
x.y.0 releases, not micro releas
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
> > behavior flagged by clang). I only handled some of the most obvious ones.
> > Passes bootstrap+testsuite o
> 2013-05-23 Martin Jambor
>
> * tree-cfg.c (verify_expr): Verify that BIT_FIELD_REFs, IMAGPART_EXPRs
> and REALPART_EXPRs have scalar type.
I cannot formally approve, but this looks the right test to me.
--
Eric Botcazou
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:29:43PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >> in the latter). And there is no conversion in between the two.
> >>
> >> Perhaps I'd have to do something like:
> >> return time_point(system_clock::now().time_since_epoch());
> >> ? Can try that.
> >
> > Ah, but the duration
On 05/24/2013 04:16 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
When FMA_EXPR was added to potential_constant_expression_1, it wasn't
added to cxx_eval_constant_expression at the same time...
Sorry.
Paolo.
Hi,
On 05/24/2013 03:36 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Why would we want to pedwarn? As far as I can tell, the standard
doesn't say this is ill-formed. 9.6 says,
"The value of the integral constant expression may be larger than the
number of bits in the object representation (3.9) of the bit-fiel
On 24 May 2013 15:16, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:48PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> > > Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
>> > > so that if it works well for Rainer,
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:07:48PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
> > > so that if it works well for Rainer, it can be applied immediately and
> > > 4.8.1-rc2
When FMA_EXPR was added to potential_constant_expression_1, it wasn't
added to cxx_eval_constant_expression at the same time...
Regression tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. David, can
you verify that this fixes bootstrap on AIX?
commit a78fee4d0a9c2a353637f239c6ac189227248491
Auth
On 24 May 2013 15:07, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> > Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
>> > so that if it works well for Rainer, it can be applied immediately and
>> > 4.8.1-rc2 rolled, even during t
On 05/24/2013 01:53 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
Also, you are not updating testsuite/ChangeLog.
http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#ChangeLogs says "There is no
established convention on when ChangeLog entries are to be made for
testsuite changes."
I prefer not to mess with testsuite/Ch
On Fri, 24 May 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 10:15:29AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this is a simple patch to reduce a bit the noise in PR57324 (undefined
behavior flagged by clang). I only handled some of the m
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:56:24PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > Jonathan/Benjamin, could you please review the patch in the mean time,
> > so that if it works well for Rainer, it can be applied immediately and
> > 4.8.1-rc2 rolled, even during the weekend?
>
>
> In the fallback for steady_cl
On 24 May 2013 14:40, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Note that for 4.8.1 this is kind of urgent, because it is blocking 4.8.1-rc2
> and thus also 4.8.1 release, so the sooner this gets resolved, the better.
Sorry about that, I didn't realise the trunk change would affect 4.8.1
> Jonathan/Benjamin, coul
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:35:15PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> > I've posted today wouldn't work well on Solaris?
>>
>> It should work on the 4.8 branch (I'll include it in my bootstraps this
>> weekend), but on mainline the failures due to missing nanosleep/-lrt
>> will
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 03:35:15PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > I've posted today wouldn't work well on Solaris?
>
> It should work on the 4.8 branch (I'll include it in my bootstraps this
> weekend), but on mainline the failures due to missing nanosleep/-lrt
> will remain.
Thanks. Please make
Why would we want to pedwarn? As far as I can tell, the standard
doesn't say this is ill-formed. 9.6 says,
"The value of the integral constant expression may be larger than the
number of bits in the object representation (3.9) of the bit-field’s
type; in such cases the extra bits are used as
Jakub Jelinek writes:
>> It occured to me that there might be a far less intrusive option to still
>> allow a Solaris backport: instead of going the libstdc++.spec route
>> (which I still think is the correct way forward), statically handle -lrt
>> addition in g++spec.c, controlled by a macro def
Hi,
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:38:10AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, 23 May 2013, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > > earlier this week I asked on IRC whether we could have non-top-level
> > > BIT_FIELD_REFs and Richi said that we could. However, when I later
> > > looked at SRA code, quite ap
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > Thanks. I wasn't aware of that wiki page. I'll be reading it today :-)
>
> The .odp attachment is actually a bit more informative, you should
> take a look at that too, if you have the time.
>
> Comments welcome, so I can include that in th
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:00:26AM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek writes:
>
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:54:05PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> >> > Agreed, that seems the best course of action if that's an option.
> >>
> >> I just remembered that we aren't there yet even on mainline:
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 04:50:34PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> This is a simple oversight in the ref-qualifier code.
>
> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. Jakub, is this OK for 4.8.1?
Ok, thanks.
> commit 0914d39b7335966f5d828c1b4225beb2e5448755
> Author: Jason Merrill
> Date:
Hi,
> Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
>
> Zdenek, does this look ok? double_int_constant_multiple_p seems to
> be only used from aff_combination_constant_multiple_p.
yes,
Zdenek
Hi!
This patch contains C++ parser changes etc. to handle
#pragma omp {teams,target {,data,update},distribute} parsing
all the way through till omp lowering (it bombs badly in omp expansion,
but already omp lowering will need to be tought out).
Things not handled yet are #pragma omp declare target
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> Thanks. I wasn't aware of that wiki page. I'll be reading it today :-)
The .odp attachment is actually a bit more informative, you should
take a look at that too, if you have the time.
Comments welcome, so I can include that in the new .texi ve
> As things stand now, if "predicable" is set to "no" for a particular
> alternative, the value of control_attr is irrelevant, that alternative
> will never have a cond_exec version. In your scheme, however,
> the presence of triggers the creation of cond_exec
> variants for all of the alternative
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:23:45PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> But for example memset/memcpy always have that set, even if no prototype
>> is in the source. So, is that decl_implicit_p really supposed to tell us
>> whether we've seen a c
On 05/24/13 13:26, Greta Yorsh wrote:
This patch (trunk r198547)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00061.html
fixes an ICE in gcc 4.8:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732
Ok to backport to 4.8 branch?
Ok.
regards
Ramana
Thanks,
Greta
gcc/ChangeLog
2013-05-02 Gr
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:23:45PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> But for example memset/memcpy always have that set, even if no prototype
> is in the source. So, is that decl_implicit_p really supposed to tell us
> whether we've seen a compatible prototype?
decl_implicit_p isn't whether we've se
This patch (trunk r198547)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg00061.html
fixes an ICE in gcc 4.8:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56732
Ok to backport to 4.8 branch?
Thanks,
Greta
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Earnshaw
> Sent: 02 May 2013 15:45
> To: Greta Yo
Hi,
I think we can resolve this very old issue too: we don't warn at all for
bitfields of size exceeding the type when it's bool or enum. I have no
idea why historically we decided to not do that, but certainly all the
modern compilers I have at hand do warn, by default, thus it seems safe
to
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:10:18PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> That's a pretty awful option name for one that makes us assume the target
>> C library has a sincos function.
>>
>> I'd rather think about a way to specify, for all known buil
Predictive commoning thinks that { a, +, a + 1 } and { 2 * a, +, a + 1 }
are just 1 iteration apart because when verifying if the difference
between a and 2*a is a multiple of a + 1 it falls into the trap
of double_int_constant_multiple_p returning true (but not initializing
a multiplier) for the
Richard, the target hook (libc_has_function) for what you described is
waiting for a review:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg01201.html
However, it doesn't have command line options support.
Alexander
2013/5/24 Richard Biener :
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Andrew Hsieh wrot
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 02:10:18PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> That's a pretty awful option name for one that makes us assume the target
> C library has a sincos function.
>
> I'd rather think about a way to specify, for all known builtins, whether GCC
> should generate calls to such function w
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Andrew Hsieh wrote:
> Bionic prior to Gingerbread doesn't support sincos*, but upstream GCC
> enables sincos optimization for OPTION_BIONIC unconditionally since
> 4.6. I'd like to propose a new flag -foptimize-sincos for NDK to
> maintain backward compatibility.
> > Unfortunately, that is a strong point against define_subst in my
> case,
> > since on arm we have more than 400 predicable patterns, of we
> which we
> > might want to modify dozens to perform this cond_exec
> restriction.
> > And creating custom subst-attributes for each one would really
> mak
After spending some time to try retaining some abnormal SSA name
uninitialized uses I gave up and just punt like below.
Bootstrap / regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Richard.
2013-05-24 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/57287
* tree-ssa-uninit.c (compute_uninit_
Bionic prior to Gingerbread doesn't support sincos*, but upstream GCC
enables sincos optimization for OPTION_BIONIC unconditionally since
4.6. I'd like to propose a new flag -foptimize-sincos for NDK to
maintain backward compatibility.
1. For BIONIC: sincos optimization is disabled by default. A
> Unfortunately, that is a strong point against define_subst in my case,
> since on arm we have more than 400 predicable patterns, of we which we
> might want to modify dozens to perform this cond_exec restriction.
> And creating custom subst-attributes for each one would really make
> things hard
Hello,
I'd like to fix this ancient PR.
The attached patch picks up the suggested changes mentioned in comment
#3 to avoid changing the FPSCR.FR bit in the sdivsi3_i4 and udivsi3_i4
library functions. As mentioned in the PR, this makes integer division
a bit slower when using -mdiv=call-fp, but i
Hi Michael,
> > - What about define_insn_and_split? Currently, we can define
> "predicable"
> > for a define_insn_and_split,
> Yes, you're right. Currently define_subst cannot be applied to
> define_insn_and_split. That's not implemented yet because I didn't
> see
> a real usages of define_substs
Hi,
both issues already fixed. Committed to mainline.
Thanks,
Paolo.
/
2013-05-24 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/26572
* g++.dg/template/error51.C: New.
2013-05-24 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/25503
* g++.dg/template/bitfield2.C: New.
Index: g++.dg/tem
On May 22, 2013 23:28Tobias Burnus wrote:
A rather simple patch found while testing the draft finalization patch.
For a "class(...), allocatable, intent(out)" dummy argument, the
actual argument has to be deallocated. That worked for scalar
polymorphic vars, but not for polymorphic arrays.
A
This (partially) coordinates the floating-point settings of the front-end and
the middle-end for the Ada compiler:
- if Machine_Overflows is set to True, -ftrapping-math is enabled in the
compiler; otherwise, it is disabled (unless overridden by the user).
- if Signed_Zeros is set to True, -fsi
This is the gigi bits to enable support for pragma No_Inline in the Ada
compiler. Nothing more to say, except that specifying also pragma Inline
yields a warning and specifying also pragma Inline_Always is an error.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on the mainline.
2013-05-24 Eric Botcaz
Adding back community
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>>
>> Ok for trunk and 4.8 after 4.8.1 is out.
>>
>
> Checked in to trunk:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-05/msg00803.html (+
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2013-05/msg00804.html for missed test).
> And 4.8 branch:
Hi Tobias,
> Rainer Orth wrote:
>> how should we proceed with this patch now, given the questions above?
>> Install as is, although it doesn't seem really beneficial, or drop it?
>
> I would install it. Actually, did you get a libquadmath dependence on
> Solaris or not?
I do, both with Solaris ld
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:54:05PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> > Agreed, that seems the best course of action if that's an option.
>>
>> I just remembered that we aren't there yet even on mainline:
>>
>> * This snippet
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 09:57:05AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Thus, what about this version (just slightly modified, headers remain the
> same, but we export _ZNSt6chrono12steady_clock3nowEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.19
> even if monotonic clock isn't supported, it will just be work the same as
> _ZNSt6chron
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
