Committed to ARM/embedded-4_8-branch
Still pending to gcc-4_8-branch.
> -Original Message-
> From: Joey Ye [mailto:joey...@arm.com]
> Sent: 27 February 2014 13:53
> To: 'ja...@redhat.com'; 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org'
> Subject: RE: [PATCH][4.8] Backport strict-volatile-bitfields fixes to 4.
[apologies if this is a dupe; I accidentally hit the send keystroke
before adding the last paragraph, and I'm not sure I was quick enough
to cancel it]
The first patch for PR debug/59992 cut down vt_initialize time in
insn-recog to less than 1/3, by avoiding quadratic behavior in
remove_useless_
We indirectly call remove_useless_values quite often during
vt_initialize; at least once per extended basic block. On functions
with thousands of small basic blocks, each adding permanent and
temporary entries to the table, that turns out to be quite expensive:
the permanent entries pile up and tr
Ping ^ 5
> -Original Message-
> From: Joey Ye [mailto:joey...@arm.com]
> Sent: 19 February 2014 17:22
> To: 'ja...@redhat.com'; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH][4.8] Backport strict-volatile-bitfields fixes to 4.8
>
> Ping ^ 4
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Joey
Some ports were failing an assertion check that was supposed to make
sure some RTX created a new VALUE, rather than reuse an existing one in
the cselib tables. The reason the value was already there was that we'd
recorded the register in the permanent table as the CFA, but the
register was correct
I've been hacking gcc's contrib/update-copyright.py for binutils,
and have run it over binutils to update all the binutils copyright
notices.
Here's an example of the update:
--- a/bfd/elf32-sparc.c
+++ b/bfd/elf32-sparc.c
@@ -1,7 +1,5 @@
/* SPARC-specific support for 32-bit ELF
- Copyright 19
Hi all:
Sorry for repeat patch content in last mail, here is the clean version
for this patch.
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.h b/gcc/config/arm/arm.h
index 7ca47a7..1638332 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.h
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.h
@@ -1152,7 +1152,7 @@ extern int arm_regs_in_sequence[];
/*
Hi Mike S., Michael E.,
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Stump [mailto:mikest...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Friday, 21 February 2014 6:17 am
> To: David Holsgrove
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Michael Eager (ea...@eagerm.com); Vidhumouli
> Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala; John Williams; Edgar Igles
ok.
David
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> Yes, patch updated:
>
> Index: gcc/auto-profile.c
> ===
> --- gcc/auto-profile.c (revision 207970)
> +++ gcc/auto-profile.c (working copy)
> @@ -1371,8 +1371,7 @@ afdo_v
Yes, patch updated:
Index: gcc/auto-profile.c
===
--- gcc/auto-profile.c (revision 207970)
+++ gcc/auto-profile.c (working copy)
@@ -1371,8 +1371,7 @@ afdo_vpt_for_early_inline (stmt_set *promoted_stmt
calculate_dominance_info
> But this caused bug 60347: turns out that we shouldn't do this
> unless the vtable (and thus the contents of the vtable) are used.
The ipa-devirt type inheritance builder will use any vtable it finds in
DECL_BINFO
of types that it knows about. It starts with types of virtual methods and
virtua
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> This patch fixes the bug of not calling compute_inline_parameters
> before early_inliner, which would lead to ICE.
>
> Testing on going, OK for google-4_8 if test passes?
>
> Thanks,
> Dehao
>
> Index: gcc/auto-profile.c
> ==
This patch fixes the bug of not calling compute_inline_parameters
before early_inliner, which would lead to ICE.
Testing on going, OK for google-4_8 if test passes?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/auto-profile.c
===
--- gcc/auto-profile.c
Dear all,
as suggested by Richard, it now only prints the namelist name and no
longer the variables of the namelist.
Bootstrapped on x86-64-gnu-linux and currently regtesting.
OK for the trunk when it succeeds?
Tobias
On February 22, 2014 10:00, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Since GCC 4.9, gfortran g
On 02/25/2014 01:53 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
The primary bug under discussion in 53808 has been fixed separately, but
it also pointed out that once devirtualization resolves the delete to
use the bar destructor, we ought to be able to inline that destructor.
So if we're devirtualizing, always add
Dear All,
The attached patch allows the original testcase to compile but
attempting to use it runs into segfaults at runtime. The initializer
for 'decay_t' has a bad FIELD_DECL for 'decay_gen_t' since it lacks
the DECL_SIZE(_UNIT) fields but the TYPE_SIZE(_UNIT) fields are OK.
The patch runs thro
As discussed in the PR, I think my earlier suggestion to use
c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings to suppress undesirable warnings from
template instantiations was wrong. That flag should only be used for
suppressing warnings that are irrelevant because the expression is never
evaluated, which may or
Ping (yeah boring to review!)
2014-02-23 20:36 GMT+01:00 Fabien Chêne :
> Ahem, patch resubmitted with the testsuite correctly adjusted this
> time. Tested x86_64 linux, still OK to commit ?
>
> 2014-02-23 Fabien Chene
> PR c++/52369
> * cp/method.c (walk_field_subobs): improve
On 02/26/2014 10:09 PM, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
This patch fixes the libgomp problems:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58028
2014-02-26 Tobias Grosser
Mircea Namolaru
Fix for bug 58028
* graphite-clast-to-gimple.c (set_cloog_options):
Don't remove scalar dimensions
Index: gcc/grap
Hi Jakub,
Did you get a chance to look at this?
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
> -Original Message-
> From: Iyer, Balaji V
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 6:17 PM
> To: 'Jakub Jelinek'
> Cc: 'Jason Merrill'; 'Jeff Law'; 'Aldy Hernandez'; 'gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org';
> 'r...@redhat.com'
On February 26, 2014 8:58:11 PM GMT+01:00, Marek Polacek
wrote:
>This fixes an oversight where we didn't run
>execute_late_warn_uninitialized
>when only -Wmaybe-uninitialize was specified -- gate_warn_uninitialized
>should take warn_maybe_uninitialized into account.
>
>Regtested/bootstrapped on x
This fixes an oversight where we didn't run execute_late_warn_uninitialized
when only -Wmaybe-uninitialize was specified -- gate_warn_uninitialized
should take warn_maybe_uninitialized into account.
Regtested/bootstrapped on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2014-02-26 Marek Polacek
PR midd
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Tim Shen wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 5:59 AM, Paolo Carlini
> wrote:
>> .. I think it would be cleaner to have new, separate testcases, named after
>> 2213. This is what we always did in the past when we implemented resolutions
>> of DRs.
>
> No problem.
B
A parameter pack of a member template that depends on a template
parameter pack from an enclosing class template is what I'm going to
call a "fixed" parameter pack: the length of the pack expansion is
determined by the template arguments of the enclosing class template,
not by any template or f
On 02/25/2014 04:27 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I'm a
little uncertain about applying this so late in the 4.9 cycle, but I
think it's a significant improvement to C++11 support.
But it broke firefox, so I've reverted it. I'll try again in stage 1.
Jason
We can never deduce an alias-template for a template template parameter,
so we should look through aliases when doing TTP deduction.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk and eventually 4.8.
commit 6fdb7f6d1c186b42adf078ebc5a9b409197a0e69
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Wed Feb 26 10:28:5
Hello Jonathan,
2014-02-20 20:19 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Schleifer :
> There is also definitely a use-after-free if you call _Unwind_DeleteException
> in your personality before returning _URC_INSTALL_CONTEXT (which you should,
> if you don't want to leak and your landing pad doesn't call it). I'm no
On 21 February 2014 12:44, Alex Velenko wrote:
> This patch adds vrnd<*>_f64 aarch64 intrinsics. A testcase for those
> intrinsics is added. Run a complete LE and BE regression run with no
> regressions.
>
> Is patch OK for stage-1?
>
> gcc/
>
> 2014-02-21 Alex Velenko
>
>
> * config/aarch
This patch change the usage for HONOR_REG_ALLOC_ORDER, currently it's
can define or not define only. it's determine how cost caculate in
register allocation during gcc build time, and can't change it during
compile time.
However in some target, define HONOR_REG_ALLOC_ORDER is good for
optimize cod
Hi Thomas!
This patch is pretty obvious. Currently ASYNC clause cannot have
integer-expression-list. Patch fixes this.
OK for gomp4 branch?
--
Ilmir.
>From df76a29ebf869687209d7a606e243624cc136dbc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ilmir Usmanov
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 19:04:47 +0400
Subject: [PA
Ping.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:38:50PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:06:14PM +, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> > This is invalid.
>
> Thanks. In that case, this patch should error out on such invalid uses as
> well, instead of ICEing.
>
> Regtested/bootstrapped on x86_
Alan Modra wrote:
> Some notes: Setting old to rl->in_reg when it is a subreg doesn't
> change the cases where delete_output_reload is called, since that call
> is protected by REG_P (old). The same thing goes for the following:
>
> /* If we are reloading a pseudo-register that was set by the
Hi all,
The generic rtx cost table was written with AArch32 cores in mind. It would be a
better idea to use the Cortex-A57 costs for the generic CPU in aarch64. That way
we schedule for the Cortex-A53 and do instruction selection for the Cortex-A57.
Since generic is the default CPU, this patc
Sorry, my yesterday mail was lost (because of my computer freeze on
unstable kernel). So I am sending the email again.
Here is the patch to fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60317
The patch speeds up the compiler in 5 times on this patalogical test and
making LRA faster reload
On 02/26/2014 03:30 PM, Mircea Namolaru wrote:
This patch fixes the libgomp problems:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58028
2014-02-26 Tobies Grosser
Mircea Namolaru
Hi Mircea,
the patch is correct.
Fix for bug 58028
* graphite-clast-to-gimple.c (set_cloog_options):
Don't remo
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, committed.
Richard.
2014-02-26 Richard Biener
PR bootstrap/60343
* lra-assigns.c (spill_for): Avoid mixed-sign comparison.
Index: gcc/lra-assigns.c
===
--- gcc/lra-assig
On 02/26/2014 10:57 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24 February 2014 09:10, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Another option would be just using boost/multiprecision/mpfr.hpp when
available. In general, I think it makes sense to have a minimum of
infrastructure enabling tests checking interoperability with boo
On 24 February 2014 09:10, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> Another option would be just using boost/multiprecision/mpfr.hpp when
> available. In general, I think it makes sense to have a minimum of
> infrastructure enabling tests checking interoperability with boost. If only
> we had a check_v3_target_hea
On 02/26/14 01:54, Terry Guo wrote:
Hi There,
As the assembler directive ".code 16" equals ".thumb", this small patch is
going to redefine the ASM_APP_OFF in a cleaner way. Tested with GCC
regression test and no regressions. Is it OK to current trunk or shall we
wait until the release-branch mod
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> > This fixes the ICE on our regular -flto-partition=none testers
> > which sees an edge w/o call-stmt after inlining (see the PR
> > for details). I'm not sure this is supposed to happen but the
> > following re-instantiates the guard to inline_updat
40 matches
Mail list logo
