On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 11:15 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 8:56 AM, bin.cheng wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The gimple-ssa-strength-reduction pass handles CAND_REFs in order to find
> > different MEM_REFs sharing common part in addressing expression. If such
> > MEM_REFs are found
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>
> On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:37 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
>>>
On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:33 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> this patch teaches
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> -- Caroline,
>
> something seems wrong with the patch, I can't build anymore. Something in
> libvtv/testsuite:
>
> make[4]: Entering directory
> `/home/paolo/Gcc/svn-dirs/trunk-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libvtv/testsuite'
> Makefile:369: *
> > Hi all, Jakub,
> >
> > On 09/07/2013 01:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >As I wrote in the PR, IMHO mangle_decl should
> > > location_t save_location = input_location;
> > > input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl);
> > >...
> > > input_location = save_location;
> > >around the call,
> Hi all, Jakub,
>
> On 09/07/2013 01:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >As I wrote in the PR, IMHO mangle_decl should
> > location_t save_location = input_location;
> > input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl);
> >...
> > input_location = save_location;
> >around the call,
> I had a look an
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
Can this throw:
void *operator new (long unsigned int s) {
return 0;
}
? Is this allowed to return 0?
I think using this function is illegal. It isn't marked noexcept, so it isn't
allowed to return 0.
And if
Hi again,
On 09/07/2013 10:41 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
-- Caroline,
something seems wrong with the patch, I can't build anymore. Something
in libvtv/testsuite:
make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/paolo/Gcc/svn-dirs/trunk-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libvtv/testsuite'
Makefile:369: *** mis
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Now flag_check_new should probably disable this optimization…
Yes, this why my point.
Ok, here it is (again, no proper testing until bootstrap is fixed)
2013-09-07 Marc Glisse
PR c++/19476
gc
-- Caroline,
something seems wrong with the patch, I can't build anymore. Something
in libvtv/testsuite:
make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/paolo/Gcc/svn-dirs/trunk-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libvtv/testsuite'
Makefile:369: *** missing separator. Stop.
Paolo.
Hi all, Jakub,
On 09/07/2013 01:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
As I wrote in the PR, IMHO mangle_decl should
location_t save_location = input_location;
input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl);
...
input_location = save_location;
around the call,
I had a look and I'm afraid this is alr
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:37 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:33 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when i
On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> Now flag_check_new should probably disable this optimization…
Yes, this why my point.
On Sep 7, 2013, at 12:37 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:33 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
isn't
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
>
>> On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:33 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>>
>>> this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
>>> isn't allowed to return a null pointer.
>>
>>
>> You sure:
>>
>> @item -
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:33 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw, isn't
allowed to return a null pointer.
You sure:
@item -fcheck-new
@opindex fcheck-new
Check that the pointer returned by @code{operat
This fixes up the spellings of filenames and classes...
Index: wide-int.cc
===
--- wide-int.cc (revision 202354)
+++ wide-int.cc (working copy)
@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ canonize (HOST_WIDE_INT *val, unsigned i
}
/*
- * Conversion routi
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> Furthermore, I do think that the compiler should have special nodes
>> for both standard placement new and the global operator new functions,
>
>
> That's one way to do it. Since this is the first time I look at those, I
> don't really see th
Hi Vasili,
2013/9/7 Vasili Galka :
> Hi Kai,
>
> I see. My apologies, I'm not familiar with the GCC merging policy.
>
> In any case, where does GCC document the list of supported
> target/host/build configurations?
>
> I was trying to build GCC 4.8.1 with following configuration: HOST &
> BUILD: C
On Sep 7, 2013, at 3:33 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw, isn't
> allowed to return a null pointer.
You sure:
@item -fcheck-new
@opindex fcheck-new
Check that the pointer returned by @code{operator new} is non-null
before attempting t
Hi Kai,
I see. My apologies, I'm not familiar with the GCC merging policy.
In any case, where does GCC document the list of supported
target/host/build configurations?
I was trying to build GCC 4.8.1 with following configuration: HOST &
BUILD: Cygwin 64bit, TARGET=arm-none-eabi
I ended up with
2013/9/7 Vasili Galka :
> Hi,
>
> Cygwin x86_64 support was implemented on trunk r197171. Given it is a
> minor configuration files change I recommend merging it to GCC 4.8
> branch.
>
> Best regards,
> Vasili
No, this won't be back-merged. It isn't a "minor configuration file change".
The gcc 4.
Hi,
Cygwin x86_64 support was implemented on trunk r197171. Given it is a
minor configuration files change I recommend merging it to GCC 4.8
branch.
Best regards,
Vasili
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Marc Glisse wrote:
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
isn't allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for
placement new (th
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Marc Glisse wrote:
>
>> this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
>> isn't allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for
>> placement new (that one may have to be handled in the
On 09/06/2013 12:03 PM, Andrew Sutton wrote:
+// Returns the template type of the class scope being entered. If we're
+// entering a constrained class scope. TMPL is the most general template
+// of the scope being entered, and TYPE is its type.
TMPL is not part of the interface of fixup_templa
OK.
Jason
On 09/06/2013 08:58 PM, Joern Rennecke wrote:
vector_targets_convertible_p is used for pointer types. The callers
do a hop, skip and dance to check that the qualifiers are satisfactory,
while OTOH vector_targets_convertible_p ignores the number of elements
in the vectors. That's fine with vecto
OK.
Jason
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Marc Glisse wrote:
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw, isn't
allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for placement new
(that one may have to be handled in the front-end or the inliner),
Placement new is a completely dif
On 09/07/2013 06:13 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Actually this kind of change makes a lot of sense to me (cmp clang too): since at that point we do
*not* really know the location of the "required from" bit, just plainly admit it. Would
it be possible in such cases to have a conditional in the diagn
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 12:37:14PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Steven Bosscher writes:
>> > Can you please add a test case?
>>
>> What kind of test would you suggest? Do we have a harness for testing
>> that -O2 and -O2 -g .text output is identical?
>
> No, but we
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 12:37:14PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Steven Bosscher writes:
>> > Can you please add a test case?
>>
>> What kind of test would you suggest? Do we have a harness for testing
>> that -O2 and -O2 -g .text output is identical?
>
> No, but we
On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
On Sat, 2013-09-07 at 12:33 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
isn't allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for
placement new (that one may have to be handle
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-09-07 at 12:33 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
>> isn't allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for
>> placement new (that
On Sat, 2013-09-07 at 12:33 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
> isn't allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for
> placement new (that one may have to be handled in the front-end or the
> inliner), a
On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 12:37:14PM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Steven Bosscher writes:
> > Can you please add a test case?
>
> What kind of test would you suggest? Do we have a harness for testing
> that -O2 and -O2 -g .text output is identical?
No, but we have -fcompare-debug, which is e
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Steven Bosscher writes:
>> Can you please add a test case?
>
> What kind of test would you suggest? Do we have a harness for testing
> that -O2 and -O2 -g .text output is identical?
Not .text, but the assembly output or the final RTL du
Steven Bosscher writes:
> Can you please add a test case?
What kind of test would you suggest? Do we have a harness for testing
that -O2 and -O2 -g .text output is identical?
I suppose the main testcase will be bootstrap if wide-int ever does get
accepted.
Thanks,
Richard
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> The problem seems to be split across IRA and LRA. In IRA we have:
>
> FOR_EACH_BB (bb)
> FOR_BB_INSNS (bb, insn)
> {
> if (! INSN_P (insn))
> continue;
> for_each_rtx (&insn, set_paradoxical_subreg, (
On Sat, Sep 07, 2013 at 11:00:22AM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> and thanks for the analysis, now I understand the issue a little more.
>
> On 09/07/2013 10:28 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >So it is just an accident that the line info is output sanely (if
> >line 9 is sane, I don't exactly know)
> I w
Hello,
this patch teaches the compiler that operator new, when it can throw,
isn't allowed to return a null pointer. Note that it doesn't work for
placement new (that one may have to be handled in the front-end or the
inliner), and it will not work on user-defined operator new if they are
inl
Hi
>What I can think of is to hide the stale source location when it no
>longer have
>defined meaning:
>Index: cgraphunit.c
>===
>--- cgraphunit.c(revision 202352)
>+++ cgraphunit.c(working copy)
>@@ -913,6 +913,7 @@
Richard Sandiford writes:
>> I've looked at the resulting wide-int.h and like it a lot
>> compared to what is on the branch (less code duplication for one).
>>
>> I think we should go ahead with this change (keeping the double-int
>> changes out for now, I didn't yet look at that patch). We can
>
While doing some work on wide-int, I hit a bootstrap comparison failure that
was caused by the RA output depending on debug insns. There was a register R
that was used normally by all "real" insns, but which was used in a paradoxical
subreg by one of the debug insns. There was also a natural equi
> Hi Honza,
>
> and thanks for the analysis, now I understand the issue a little more.
>
> On 09/07/2013 10:28 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >So it is just an accident that the line info is output sanely (if
> >line 9 is sane, I don't exactly know)
> I would say that in general it's definitely sane, b
Hi Honza,
and thanks for the analysis, now I understand the issue a little more.
On 09/07/2013 10:28 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
So it is just an accident that the line info is output sanely (if line
9 is sane, I don't exactly know)
I would say that in general it's definitely sane, because that is t
> > >+ 2013-09-04 Jan Hubicka
> > >+
> > >+ PR middle-end/58201
> > >+ * cgraphunit.c (analyze_functions): Clear AUX fields
> > >+ after processing; initialize assembler name has.
> > >+
> > I checked and double checked and with this commit a C++ test regressed:
> >
> > FAIL: g++.dg/template
Jeff Law writes:
> +2013-09-06 Jeff Law
> +
> + * tree-ssa-dom.c (cprop_into_successor_phis): Also propagate
> + edge implied equivalences into successor phis.
This is causing bootstrap miscompare (in gcc/compare-elim.o) on ia64.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GP
Hello!
It looks that it is too hard for the compiler to track deref_align
initialization through dependent deref_base boolean. The patch bellow
fixes "may be used uninitialized" warning that breaks
profiledbootstrap.
2013-09-07 Uros Bizjak
* ipa-prop.c (ipa_modify_call_arguments): Initial
Hi,
this is a variant of patch I tested and comitted after discussion on
DECL_ARGUMENTS change.
Basically ARGUMENTS are now part of a functio nbody and we need to stream them
for thunks
in order to be able to expand them. The patch also fixes misplaced pop_cfun in
lto-streamer-in.c.
Bootstrapp
> >+ 2013-09-04 Jan Hubicka
> >+
> >+PR middle-end/58201
> >+* cgraphunit.c (analyze_functions): Clear AUX fields
> >+after processing; initialize assembler name has.
> >+
> I checked and double checked and with this commit a C++ test regressed:
>
> FAIL: g++.dg/template/cond2.C -st
51 matches
Mail list logo
