On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 5:57 AM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> Patch attached.
>>
>> Ok for trunk?
>
>
> Just noticed Uros's input about predicates. So, ok with fix of predicate?
Please retest and repost the patch with the predicate fix.
Looks good otherwise, with a couple of minor changes below:
dif
Yury wrote:
>> Still sounds like a bug elsewhere to me.
>
> Let me investigate this deeper tomorrow (rebuilding fresh Dg, etc.).
So I've double-checked that this is a problem with trunk DejaGNU rsh.exp
script removing trailing newline from test output:
# Delete one trailing \n because that
> Patch attached.
>
> Ok for trunk?
>
Just noticed Uros's input about predicates. So, ok with fix of predicate?
Ping!
-Balaji V. Iyer.
> -Original Message-
> From: Iyer, Balaji V
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 1:12 PM
> To: Jakub Jelinek
> Cc: 'Aldy Hernandez (al...@redhat.com)'; 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: RE: [GOMP4][PATCH] SIMD-enabled functions (formerly Elemental
> functions) for
This testcase was crashing in strip_typedefs because it uses
build_cplus_array_type, while the original type was built with the
generic build_array_type, and the two functions work differently within
a template such that we violated an assert in strip_typedefs. Fixed by
using build_cplus_array
We need to handle getting NULL_TREE for the capture initializer, so that
we don't crash when trying to do things like look at its type.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 135f0f322516ce986ed13a214ca9351bd1963749
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Mon Dec 23 15:05:00 2013 -0500
Spotted by David Binderman and cppcheck, thanks. The
interesting cases wouldn't be exposed by a cris-elf build, but I
made a regtest-run nonetheless: the fix has actually been in our
local tree for quite some time together with TLS for CRIS v32 so
I'm not worried about fallout. (Upstreaming that?
The circumstances are a bit odd; the stack-pointer (sp) is never
the target for a direct assignment in "ordinary" generated code.
Still, this happens for gcc.dg/pr50251.c, calling
__builtin_stack_restore. There's a bug in several define_splits
in the CRIS port, in that the destination of the split
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
> On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
>>
>> wrote:
>> > On Monday 23 December 2013, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
>> >> On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> >
On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
>
> wrote:
> > On Monday 23 December 2013, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> >> On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
Re-sending as plaintext.
Jakub wrote:
> Or is it stripping just the final newline at the end of output?
Exactly.
> Still sounds like a bug elsewhere to me.
Let me investigate this deeper tomorrow (rebuilding fresh Dg, etc.).
If it indeed turns out to be feature of current DejaGNU, workaround
ma
On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 12:13 -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 12/13/2013 10:58 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > {
> > gimple stmt = SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (x);
> > @@ -2162,7 +2162,7 @@ chain_of_csts_start (struct loop *loop, tree x)
> > if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_PHI)
> > {
> >
Thanks. Committed with suggested change.
Merry Christmas!
Bingfeng
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: 23 December 2013 16:48
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [followup to PR59569] new vect tests for store with
negativ
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen
wrote:
> On Monday 23 December 2013, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
>> On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
>> > > On Thursday 19 December 2013, Gopalasubramanian,
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 5:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:11:12PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 8:28 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> >> > > >>> > Perhaps we should add sandybridge, ivybridge and haswell
>> >> > > >>> > aliases for
>> >> > > >>> > corei7-avx, co
On Monday 23 December 2013, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > > On Thursday 19 December 2013, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh wrote:
> > > > > Sorry, I must have been looking at an older
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> Rebased patch in the bottom.
> Adding the patch.
The same comment as in 7/8 applies here. The predicate is not
exclusive to expanders, should also be used in insn patterns. The name
of the predicate is a bit weird, please name it simply
"ro
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 04:43:17PM +, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Here are two vectorization tests for store with negative step. This is
> follow-up to PR59569 fix, which contains two tests for ICE. These tests
> are for vectorization tests and executable. OK to commit?
--- testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/v
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 02 Dec 16:11, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> Hello,
>> On 19 Nov 12:12, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > On 15 Nov 20:08, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> > > > Is it ok for trunk?
>> > > Ping.
>> > Ping.
>> Ping.
> Ping.
>
> Rebased patch
Hi,
Here are two vectorization tests for store with negative step. This is
follow-up to PR59569 fix, which contains two tests for ICE. These tests are for
vectorization tests and executable. OK to commit?
Thanks,
Bingfeng
patch_vect_tests
Description: patch_vect_tests
On Monday 23 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 December 2013, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh wrote:
> > > > Sorry, I must have been looking at an older version, but as I said I
> > > > already did enable it in the la
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 02 Dec 16:10, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> Hello,
>> On 19 Nov 12:11, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > On 15 Nov 20:07, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> > > > Is it ok for trunk?
>> > > Ping.
>> > Ping.
>> Ping.
> Ping.
>
> Rebased patch
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 07:59:47PM +0400, Yury Gribov wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This patch fixes problem with UBSan tests failing on remote target
> platforms (ARM via SSH). The error is caused by DejaGNU harness
> stripping trailing newline from test output (and thus causing
> pattern matching failu
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Kirill Yukhin
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> On 02 Dec 16:09, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> On 19 Nov 12:08, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>>> > Hello,
>>> > On 15 Nov 20:06, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>>> > > Ping.
>>> > Ping.
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
> On 02 Dec 16:09, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> Hello,
>> On 19 Nov 12:08, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > On 15 Nov 20:06, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
>> > > Ping.
>> > Ping.
>> Ping.
> Ping.
>
> Rebased patch in the bottom.
At the end of
Hi folks,
This patch fixes problem with UBSan tests failing on remote target
platforms (ARM via SSH). The error is caused by DejaGNU harness
stripping trailing newline from test output (and thus causing pattern
matching failures).
Link to PR: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59585
Committed. I will prepare some new tests as you suggested.
Thanks,
Bingfeng
-Original Message-
From: Jakub Jelinek [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
Sent: 23 December 2013 14:53
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; H.J. Lu (hjl.to...@gmail.com)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PR59569
On Mon,
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 02:23:49PM +, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Thanks for suggestion. Please find attached patch. GCC is bootstrapped and
> passes testsuite on x86-64. Let me know if it is OK to commit.
Ok, thanks.
Would be nice to add runtime testcases for both cases (test whether
vectorizatio
All the 3 tests are tested and the first two are included in my patch. Didn't
include the third one as it is not reduced.
Bingfeng
-Original Message-
From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com]
Sent: 23 December 2013 14:28
To: Bingfeng Mei
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Jakub Jelinek (ja...
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 6:25 AM, Bingfeng Mei wrote:
> Hi, Jakub,
>
> Thanks for suggestion. Please find attached patch. GCC is bootstrapped and
> passes testsuite on x86-64. Let me know if it is OK to commit. (Sorry if you
> received this mail twice as I forgot to set to text format).
>
Please
Hi, Jakub,
Thanks for suggestion. Please find attached patch. GCC is bootstrapped and
passes testsuite on x86-64. Let me know if it is OK to commit. (Sorry if you
received this mail twice as I forgot to set to text format).
Thanks,
Bingfeng Mei
patch_pr59569
Description: patch_pr59569
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:11:12PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Please get someone to review config.gcc changes. They are OK as far as
> x86 rename is concerned, but I can't review functional changes.
Hi Paolo,
Can you review this config.gcc change?
>
> > @@ -588,6 +588,22 @@ esac
> > # Common
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:20:39AM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Thursday 19 December 2013, Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh wrote:
> > > Sorry, I must have been looking at an older version, but as I said I
> > > already did enable it in the latest patch. (see
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pa
On Sat, 14 Dec 2013, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 2013-12-14 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR middle-end/58956
> PR middle-end/59470
> * gimple-walk.h (walk_stmt_load_store_addr_fn): New typedef.
> (walk_stmt_load_store_addr_ops, walk_stmt_load_store_ops): Use it
> for callback param
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As described in the PR, the ICE reason was the typo made when introducing
> calls to add_hard_reg_set. Fixed by the first attached patch, bootstrapped
> and tested on both ia64 and x86_64, committed as obvious.
>
> The test
Hi,
assuming I didn't miss anything (I'm still catching up with my emails),
I'd like to ping the below. Thanks!
Paolo.
///
On 12/10/2013 01:54 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
as far as I can see, this bug asks for the implementation of
Core/1442, thus don't do a special K
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 10:52:25AM +0400, Andrey Belevantsev wrote:
> As described in the PR, the ICE reason was the typo made when
> introducing calls to add_hard_reg_set. Fixed by the first attached
> patch, bootstrapped and tested on both ia64 and x86_64, committed as
> obvious.
>
> The test c
37 matches
Mail list logo
