On 24/01/15 22:46 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Observe that my __is_transparent alias template takes two template
arguments, so that it depends on the template parameter of the
function, not only on _Compare. That means whether if the type is
s/whether //
invalid that will be found during te
On 24/01/15 23:03 +0100, François Dumont wrote:
Sorry, I hadn't notice the condition to expose the new methods. It was
hidden within the _Rb_tree type that I hadn't check (and I do not
often check the Standard directly for my limited patches).
On my side I am surprised you didn't reuse your co
Sorry, I hadn't notice the condition to expose the new methods. It was
hidden within the _Rb_tree type that I hadn't check (and I do not often
check the Standard directly for my limited patches).
On my side I am surprised you didn't reuse your code to detect member
types. I am also surprised t
Hi,
the attached patch fixes PR 64770, by checking whether a string is a
null pointer before calling strdup() on it. Committed r220086 as
obvious.
libgfortran ChangeLog:
2015-01-24 Janne Blomqvist
PR libfortran/64770
* io/unit.c (filename_from_unit): Check that u->filename != NULL
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:13:04PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>if (s1->as->type == AS_EXPLICIT)
> - for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + s1->as->corank; i++)
> + for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + std::max(0, s1->as->corank-1); i++)
Doesn't this require '#include '?
I suspect that you are d
Hi Alex,
On Friday 2014-11-21 10:07, Alex Velenko wrote:
> Can someone, please, approve?
we tried to document this in https://gcc.gnu.org/svnwrite.html .
Can you perhaps suggest a way for us to improve this to make
it more clear or easier to find?
Gerald
Bootstrap on FreeBSD 10.x/i386 is now broken:
libtool: compile: /scratch2/tmp/gerald/OBJ-0124-0939/./gcc/xgcc
-B/scratch2/tmp/gerald/OBJ-0124-0939/./gcc/
-B/home/gerald/gcc-ref10-i386/i386-unknown-freebsd10.1/bin/
-B/home/gerald/gcc-ref10-i386/i386-unknown-freebsd10.1/lib/ -isystem
/home/gera
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:53 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >>> The new Silvermont aswell and Broadwell model numbers are in
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/manuals/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.pdf
>> >>>
>> >>> This patch updates host_detect_local_c
gfortran's scalar coarray are special: The descriptorless variant is a
normal variable with some language-specific additional information
(corank, bounds). The descriptor variant has a descriptor but the _data
component is just a pointer to the scalar variable.
As the element type of a descrip
Janus Weil wrote:
this is a second patch dealing with finalization-related regressions,
[...]
This patch fixes an invalid memory reference inside the finalizer
routine (at runtime), which apparently was caused by dereferencing a
pointer without checking if it's NULL. I simply insert a call to
ASS
Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk and 4.9? (It's a regression.)
Tobias
2015-01-24 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/64771
gcc/fortran/
* interface.c (check_dummy_characteristics): Fix coarray handling.
testsuite/
* gfortran.dg/coarray_36.f: New.
* gfortran.dg/coarray_37.f9
Seemingly, we missed a gfc_error call, which takes two locations, which
is not yet supported. Hence, the old version (gfc_error_1) has to be used.
Committed as Rev. 220084 as obvious.
Tobias
Index: gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
===
--- gcc
Hi Jakub,
Thank you and I committed the patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=220083.
regards,
Venkat.
On 24 January 2015 at 20:38, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 08:09:24PM +0530, Venkataramanan Kumar wrote:
>> Index: libsanitizer/ChangeLog
>> ===
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 08:09:24PM +0530, Venkataramanan Kumar wrote:
> Index: libsanitizer/ChangeLog
> ===
> --- libsanitizer/ChangeLog(revision 220079)
> +++ libsanitizer/ChangeLog(working copy)
> @@ -1,5 +1,11 @@
> 2015-01-
Hi Jakub,
On 24 January 2015 at 14:40, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 01:23:22PM +0530, Venkataramanan Kumar wrote:
>> I reused libgcc's "host_address" test and the patch passed normal
>> bootstrap in x86_64.
>>
>> Can you please check if this is fine ?
>
> Can't you just use what
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:16:42AM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 06:37:01PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> The new Silvermont aswell and Broadwell model numbers are in
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:29 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Jeff Law writes:
>> On 01/14/15 16:52, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>>>The problem of unexpected code generation is discussed on
>>>
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64110
>>>
>>>The following patch introduces 2 new co
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 06:37:01PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
The new Silvermont aswell and Broadwell model numbers are in
h
Matthew Fortune writes:
>> 2015-01-23 Robert Suchanek
>>
>> * config/mips/mips.c (mips_hard_regno_mode_ok_p): Prohibit
>> accumulators
>> for all vector modes.
>
> This seems like a genuine bug and although it can only be triggered by
> loongson or paired-single support it probably q
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:48:50PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 03:39:40PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> > I understand that argument. But it is not what GCC actually does, nor
>> > what I think it should do. Consider this program:
>>
Jeff Law writes:
> On 01/14/15 16:52, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>>The problem of unexpected code generation is discussed on
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64110
>>
>>The following patch introduces 2 new constraints '^' and '$' which
>> are analogous to '?' and '!' but di
Jeff Law writes:
> On 01/15/15 03:13, Robert Suchanek wrote:
>>> Robert, can you look at reload.c::reload_inner_reg_of_subreg and verify
>>> that the comment just before its return statement is effectively the
>>> situation you're in.
>>>
>>> There are certainly cases where a SUBREG needs to be tr
On Saturday 24 January 2015, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> >>> 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
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 10-12-14 17:35, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Ilya Tocar
>> wrote:
>
>
>>> gcc/testsuite/
>>> * gcc.target/i386/funcspec-5.c: Test avx512f and knl.
>>
>>
>
>>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/funcs
On 10-12-14 17:35, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Ilya Tocar wrote:
gcc/testsuite/
* gcc.target/i386/funcspec-5.c: Test avx512f and knl.
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/funcspec-5.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/funcspec-5.c
+extern void test_av
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Hello!
>
>>> 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 noticed it wasn't there. So I wrote this patch to add it,
>>> >
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 06:37:01PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> The new Silvermont aswell and Broadwell model numbers are in
>>>
>>> http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/m
ping!
2015-01-19 15:41 GMT+01:00 Janus Weil :
> Hi,
>
> this is a second patch dealing with finalization-related regressions,
> after the one I submitted yesterday
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-01/msg00109.html), which btw is
> also still waiting for review ...
>
> This patch fixes an i
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:50 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 06:37:01PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> The new Silvermont aswell and Broadwell model numbers are in
>>
>> http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/manuals/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.pdf
>>
>>
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 01:23:22PM +0530, Venkataramanan Kumar wrote:
> I reused libgcc's "host_address" test and the patch passed normal
> bootstrap in x86_64.
>
> Can you please check if this is fine ?
Can't you just use what configure.tgt already uses?
x86_64-*-linux* | i?86-*-linux*)
Hi Rainer,
Please find the corrected patch attached. I removed some eval
statements I added for debugging.
regards,
Venkat,
On 24 January 2015 at 13:23, Venkataramanan Kumar
wrote:
> Hi Rainer,
>
> I reused libgcc's "host_address" test and the patch passed normal
> bootstrap in x86_64.
>
> Can
31 matches
Mail list logo
