ok.
David
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> Fixes a problem caused by my recent change to allow aux functions to
> be removed. They need to be kept until after LIPO linking/static
> promotion, since they affect the promoted names of any static
> variables defined within th
Fixes a problem caused by my recent change to allow aux functions to
be removed. They need to be kept until after LIPO linking/static
promotion, since they affect the promoted names of any static
variables defined within their context.
Passes regression and internal testing. Ok for google/4_9?
Th
I noticed a number of typos in the documentation for the
devirtualization optimization options in invoke.texi, also in the short
option description in common.opt. When I was browsing the code to make
sure I understood the purpose of these options, I noticed that there
were very many more typos
I noticed that the documentation for -fopt-info in invoke.texi had
numerous markup problems. While I was tidying that up, I saw that it
also said contradictory things about the defaults in different
paragraphs, so I fixed that as well by consolidating the discussion (and
checking the source co
On 02/01/15 19:59 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 2 January 2015 at 18:05, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2 Jan 2015 16:41:38, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 01/02/2015 04:33 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
The misc-inst.cc change looks good but as this is a libstdc++ bug the
testcase should b
Unfortunately I did the check for not-power-of-two in the wrong way.
Committed as obvious.
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (Revision 219151)
+++ ChangeLog (Revision 219152)
@@ -1,5 +1,9 @@
2015-01-02 Bernd Edlinger
+
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> That's done now, so please go ahead and commit the fix.
Committed. I obviously used wrong branch (which doesn't include the
actual change) for testing so I missed the testing failure. Sorry
about that. :(
--
Regards,
Tim Shen
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 11:01:56PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> 2015-01-02 Bernd Edlinger
>
> Instrument bit field and unaligned accesses for TSAN.
> * sanitizer.def (BUILT_IN_TSAN_READ_RANGE): New built-in function.
> (BUILT_IN_TSAN_WRITE_RANGE): New built-
Hi,
On Fri, 2 Jan 2015 22:29:01, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 10:06:29PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> OK, I will do that.
>> I removed the __tsan_vptr_update stuff from the patch, for now.
>
> Guess we should ask Dmitry about that.
>
>> It will probably be difficult for me
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 10:06:29PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> OK, I will do that.
> I removed the __tsan_vptr_update stuff from the patch, for now.
Guess we should ask Dmitry about that.
> It will probably be difficult for me to find a test case for this,
> because I am not really sure what _
On Fri, 2 Jan 2015 20:01:02, Jakub Jelinke wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 09:20:57PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
>> --- gcc/sanitizer.def (revision 218963)
>> +++ gcc/sanitizer.def (working copy)
>> @@ -188,6 +188,10 @@ DEF_SANITIZER_BUILTIN(BUILT_IN_TSAN_WRITE8, "__tsa
>> BT_FN_VOID_PTR,
On Jan 2, 2015, at 3:28 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> As found by Alessandro: Statically allocated coarrays in declared in the
> specification part of a module didn't work (link-time failure). The reason
> was that the associated coarray token was wrongly mangled and not a public
> tree.
>
> I ad
On 2 January 2015 at 18:05, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2015 16:41:38, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 01/02/2015 04:33 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> The misc-inst.cc change looks good but as this is a libstdc++ bug the
>>> testcase should be under the libstdc++-v3/test
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 09:20:57PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> --- gcc/sanitizer.def (revision 218963)
> +++ gcc/sanitizer.def (working copy)
> @@ -188,6 +188,10 @@ DEF_SANITIZER_BUILTIN(BUILT_IN_TSAN_WRITE8, "__tsa
> BT_FN_VOID_PTR, ATTR_NOTHROW_LEAF_LIST)
> DEF_SANITIZER_
On 12/30/2014 10:44 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/27/2014 07:56 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
I would like peoples opinion of adding another column to the tables
indicating C++ feature status for C++11 and C++14 that contains the
relevant SD-6 feature macro.
Sure, that makes sense.
Jason
J
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 02:38:09PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 December 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 01:28:47PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote:
> > > I recently wanted to use multiversioning for BMI2 specific extensions
> > > PDEP/PEXT, and no
Hi,
On Fri, 2 Jan 2015 16:41:38, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 01/02/2015 04:33 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> The misc-inst.cc change looks good but as this is a libstdc++ bug the
>> testcase should be under the libstdc++-v3/testsuite dir and the patch
>> should be CC'd to the libstdc++ lis
2015-01-02 17:24 GMT+01:00 Tobias Burnus :
>>> Looking through the stashed patches, I realized a pending (unsubmitted)
>>> patch, showing that both a test case for CO_REDUCE was missing and that
>>> libcaf_single didn't include co_reduce.
>>>
>>> This patch adds them.
>>>
>>> Build and regtested on
On 2 January 2015 at 16:19, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 2 January 2015 at 01:29, Tim Shen wrote:
>> Oh, errr... I'm not sure if it needs a review by probably Jonathan?
>
> I think it qualifies as obvious and so doesn't need approval, but
> please wait for me to rotate the ChangeLog file, so we star
Make Doxygen use the right tab size.
Committed to trunk.
commit d8314acccb012f4c166ef2667b08190d31a308d1
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Fri Jan 2 15:56:22 2015 +
PR libstdc++/64468
* doc/doxygen/user.cfg.in: Set correct TAB_SIZE.
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/doc/doxygen/user.
On 22/12/14 16:41 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Thanks, Kai. Here's the full patch, which enables std::stoi etc.
(everything except std::to_wstring) for MinGW.org
Tested powerpc64-linux, committed to trunk.
I shouldn't have removed the dg-require-string-conversions from the
tests, because that
Committed as r219144.
Cheers,
Janus
2015-01-02 17:13 GMT+01:00 Janus Weil :
> 2015-01-02 17:02 GMT+01:00 Tobias Burnus :
>> + int ext = dt->attr.extension;
>> + while (ext>0 && gfc_find_component (dt->components->ts.u.derived,
>> pick->name,
>> + true, true))
>> +{
>> + dt = dt->
Hi Janus,
Janus Weil wrote:
Looking through the stashed patches, I realized a pending (unsubmitted)
patch, showing that both a test case for CO_REDUCE was missing and that
libcaf_single didn't include co_reduce.
This patch adds them.
Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk?
On 2 January 2015 at 01:29, Tim Shen wrote:
> Oh, errr... I'm not sure if it needs a review by probably Jonathan?
I think it qualifies as obvious and so doesn't need approval, but
please wait for me to rotate the ChangeLog file, so we start a new
file for 2015. I'm going to do that in the next hou
2015-01-02 17:02 GMT+01:00 Tobias Burnus :
> + int ext = dt->attr.extension;
> + while (ext>0 && gfc_find_component (dt->components->ts.u.derived,
> pick->name,
> + true, true))
> +{
> + dt = dt->components->ts.u.derived;
> + c = gfc_constructor_first (c->expr->value.constructo
Hi Tobias,
> Looking through the stashed patches, I realized a pending (unsubmitted)
> patch, showing that both a test case for CO_REDUCE was missing and that
> libcaf_single didn't include co_reduce.
>
> This patch adds them.
>
> Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
> OK for the trunk?
looks
Hi,
On 01/02/2015 04:33 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
The misc-inst.cc change looks good but as this is a libstdc++ bug the
testcase should be under the libstdc++-v3/testsuite dir and the patch
should be CC'd to the libstdc++ list.
... and shouldn't be a dg-do run, I would add.
Paolo.
An early PING.
Last year, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Looking through the stashed patches, I realized a pending
(unsubmitted) patch, showing that both a test case for CO_REDUCE was
missing and that libcaf_single didn't include co_reduce.
This patch adds them.
Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux
On 1 January 2015 at 08:50, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch fixes unresolved externals with c++98 std::string templates.
>
> Boot-strapped and Regression-tested on x86_64-linux-gnu.
> OK for trunk?
The misc-inst.cc change looks good but as this is a libstdc++ bug the
testcase should be
> As found by Alessandro: Statically allocated coarrays in declared in the
> specification part of a module didn't work (link-time failure). The reason
> was that the associated coarray token was wrongly mangled and not a public
> tree.
>
> I additionally propagated the dg-compile-aux-modules s
Hi all,
the attached patch fixes a problem with PARAMETER variables of
extended derived type: When resolving component references to the such
variables, we have to find the right component of the corresponding
structure constructor expression, which is done by the function
'find_component_ref'.
T
2014-12-31 19:13 GMT+01:00 Tobias Burnus :
>> here is a patch to improve diagnostics for dummy procedures. Regtested
>> on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
>
> Looks good to me. Thanks for the patch!
Thanks, committed as r219141.
Cheers,
Janus
>> 2014-12-29 Janus Weil
>>
>> PR f
As found by Alessandro: Statically allocated coarrays in declared in the
specification part of a module didn't work (link-time failure). The
reason was that the associated coarray token was wrongly mangled and not
a public tree.
I additionally propagated the dg-compile-aux-modules support to c
On Tuesday 2014-12-30 18:49, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> I hope I taken into account all your inputs.
> Updated patch in the bottom.
This looks good, thank you Kirill.
The only small detail I'd make is replacing the explicit "Details"
link and making "offloading support was added to GCC" that link.
G
When compiling GDB 7.8.1, I get this warning in libiberty:
gcc -c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -O0 -g3 -D__USE_MINGW_ACCESS -I. -I./../include
-W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wc++-compat -Wstrict-prototypes -pedantic
./strerror.c -o strerror.o
./strerror.c:472:12: warning: '_sys_nerr' redeclared witho
On Fri, 2 Jan 2015, James Bowman wrote:
> Sorry, should have been clearer.
>
> Please can someone review and apply this patch, as I don't have write access
> to the tree. Thanks.
JFTR: to "apply this patch" to config.sub and config.guess is
not the way to do it; not a valid request. Review of p
36 matches
Mail list logo
