On October 27, 2014 1:49:54 AM CET, David Edelsohn wrote:
>Richi,
>
>Does genmatch rely on static constructors or implicitly rely on the
>order of static constructors? Sometimes those cause problems on AIX.
No, it doesn't.
>Bootstrap on AIX succeeds prior to r216631, e.g., r216624. It works
>af
Andi Kleen writes:
Ping!
Can someone from the C++ side please approve this patch?
That's the only patch not approved in this patch kit, but blocking
the commit.
-Andi
> From: Andi Kleen
>
> Add calls for several illegal Cilk cases to the C++ frontend.
> C++ usually doesn't ICE unlike C on ill
Hi,
This patch adds support for -mlong-calls option for aarch64 port. Major
code borrowed from ARM.
I'm doing regression test for it right now. Any comments?
Index: gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.opt
===
--- gcc/config/aarch6
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Function noce_try_store_flag_mask converts "if (test) x = 0;" to "x &=
> -(test == 0);"
>
> But from code size view, "x &= -(test == 0);" might have more instructions
> than "if (test) x = 0;". The patch checks the cost to determine
Hi,
Function noce_try_store_flag_mask converts "if (test) x = 0;" to "x &=
-(test == 0);"
But from code size view, "x &= -(test == 0);" might have more instructions
than "if (test) x = 0;". The patch checks the cost to determine the
conversion is valuable or not.
Bootstrap and no make check regr
On 10/27/14 2:22, Michael Eager wrote:
> On 10/26/14 03:36, Chen Gang wrote:
>> On 10/22/2014 09:34 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>
>
> Yes, if you want to test on a target, you will need a target. You can
> either have a simulator (see binutils and sim/* for an example of how to
> wr
Richi,
Does genmatch rely on static constructors or implicitly rely on the
order of static constructors? Sometimes those cause problems on AIX.
Bootstrap on AIX succeeds prior to r216631, e.g., r216624. It works
after your commit r216619 to correct Makefile.in, or prior to that by
manually editi
OK.
Jason
I believe I sent this yesterday to the incorrect list...
-- Forwarded message --
From: John Schmerge
Date: Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 1:58 AM
Subject: g++ off-by-one bug in utf16 conversion
To: gcc-b...@gcc.gnu.org
Hey guys,
I came across this bug earlier today in implementing some
Sebastian Pop wrote:
> Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 08/21/14 04:30, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >>It turns Jeff's jump-threading code in to a strange franken-pass of bits
> > >>and
> > >>pieces of detection and optimisation, and would need some substantial
> > >>reworking to fit in with Jeff's changes las
I committed this as https://gcc.gnu.org/r216720 following all your
comments except for:
On 23 October 2014 12:31, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> +
>> +/* Construct a C++-aware pretty-printer for CONTEXT. It is assumed
>> + that CONTEXT->printer is an already constructed basic pretty_printer. */
>
On 10/26/14 03:36, Chen Gang wrote:
On 10/22/2014 09:34 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
Yes, if you want to test on a target, you will need a target. You can either
have a simulator (see binutils and sim/* for an example of how to write one) or
target hardware in some form.
After tried 'sim', I fo
On 24 October 2014 10:07, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 21 October 2014 14:02, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> This patch series is an updated version of the series I sent here:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00022.html
>>
>> I addressed comments from Marcus and Richard, and decided to
On 22 October 2014 10:56, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
>> From: Christophe Lyon [mailto:christophe.l...@linaro.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 10:03 PM
>> > +typedef int SItype __attribute__ ((mode (SI)));
>> What's the purpose of this? It seems unused.
>
> Sigh. Bad copy/paste from optimize-
On 10/25/14 03:05, Richard Sandiford wrote:
This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
Tested by making sure there were no code changes for gcc.dg, gcc.c-torture
and g++.dg for microblaze-elf. OK to install?
Yes, this is OK. Please check for trailing whitespace.
The attached change fixes an unwind problem during pthread
cancellation. For threads,
it turns out the return address is not marked as undefined. As a
result, pa32_fallback_frame_state
is called with an invalid context and the code generates a
segmentation fault looking for
the signal tramp
On 10/22/2014 09:34 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Yes, if you want to test on a target, you will need a target. You can
>>> either have a simulator (see binutils and sim/* for an example of how to
>>> write one) or target hardware in some form.
>>>
After tried 'sim', I found the root cause is
On October 26, 2014 12:26:29 AM CEST, David Edelsohn wrote:
>Richard,
>
>I confirmed again with gcc111, which fails with r216632 and succeeds
>with r216624.
Can you revert r216631 but still keep the r216632 fix? I suppose bootstrap
before r216632 still fails on AIX?
I'll try to reproduce on ppc
18 matches
Mail list logo
