I just committed the obvious fix below that fix build failure introduced by
revision 222371.
*** gcc/ChangeLog ***
2015-04-24 Thomas Preud'homme
* config/arm/unknown-elf.h (ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL): fix
ternary operator in fprintf and harmonize spacing.
diff --git a/g
Hello!
2015-04-24 Uros Bizjak
* config/i386/sse.md (*vec_concatv2sf_sse4_1): Do not allow both
input operands in memory.
(*vec_concatv2si_sse4_1): Ditto.
(*vec_concatv2df): Ditto, except for SSE3 and equal input operands.
(vec_extract_lo_): Change operand 1 predicate to
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 04:31:52PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I checked this patch into gcc-5-branch.
That's wrong according to https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html#num_scheme
> Index: ChangeLog
> ===
> --- ChangeLog (revision 2223
Hi,
I was looking into reordering optimization queue of early passes. This is
motivated by PR57249 and fact that I run into some super sily loops while
looking into firefox dumps. It indeed makes a lot of sense for me as for code
dealing with short arrays this enables more SRA/FRE/DSE.
I added c
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 11:15 AM
>
> So revised review is "ok for the trunk" :-)
Committed.
Best regards,
Thomas
+ expr = fold (expr);
/* This may happen, because for LHS op= RHS we preevaluate
RHS and create C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR >, which
means we could no longer see the code of the EXPR. */
if (TREE_CODE (expr) == C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR)
expr = C_MAYBE_CONST_EXPR_EXPR (expr);
if (TREE_
I noticed that make clean isn't removing C++ binaries. It was broken here
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg00214.html
Removing stagestuff accidentally removed those items from the
mostlyclean rule. They need to be re-added to the language dependent
mostlyclean rules. All of the
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch fixes PR65802.
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/
pr65802.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr65802.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..26e5317
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr65802.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +//
On 04/23/2015 09:10 PM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 10:59 AM
Hi Jeff,
+
+static bool
+cprop_reg_p (const_rtx x)
+{
+ return REG_P (x) && !HARD_REGISTER_P (x);
+}
How about instead this move to a more visible location (perha
On 04/22/2015 12:36 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Currently, we warn if the right operand of a shift expression is negative,
or greater than or equal to the length in bits of the promoted left operand.
But we don't warn when we see a left shift of a negative value. That is
undefined behavior since C
On 03/18/2015 12:19 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/17/2015 04:35 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'll test both. In the common case, the cost is going to be the basic
bookkeeping so that we can compute the transparent property. The
actual
computat
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 10:59 AM
>
Hi Jeff,
> > +
> > +static bool
> > +cprop_reg_p (const_rtx x)
> > +{
> > + return REG_P (x) && !HARD_REGISTER_P (x);
> > +}
> How about instead this move to a more visible location (perhaps a macro
> in regs.h
On 04/16/2015 02:43 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 8:48 PM
I know there were several followups between Steven and yourself.
With
stage1 now open, can you post a final version and do a final
bootstrap/test with it?
Here is what
This patch is another incremental step in cleaning up the attribute
documentation in extend.texi. Here I have tried to bring some sanity to
the function attribute section by splitting off subsections to cover
target-specific attributes and behavior, and alphabetizing the main
table of common a
On 04/23/2015 02:46 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This PR points out a problem with enum forward declarations (so C++ is out as
these are forbidden in C++). If we forward declare an enum, and later on
declare the enum with __attribute__ ((packed)), the attribute is ignored. The
reason is that when
On 04/16/2015 05:04 AM, Jiong Wang wrote:
This is a rework of
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01998.html
After second thinking, I feel it's better to fix this in earlier stage
during RTL expand which is more generic, and we also avoid making the
already complex combine pass co
On Apr 6, 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> So the bulk of the changes into this routine are really about picking
>>> a good leader, which presumably is how we're able to get the desired
>>> effects on debuginfo that we used to get from tree-ssa-copyrename.c?
>>
>> This has nothing to do with debuginfo
On 04/21/2015 08:24 AM, Jiong Wang wrote:
Jiong Wang writes:
2015-04-14 18:24 GMT+01:00 Jeff Law :
On 04/14/2015 10:48 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
So I think this stage2/3 binary difference is acceptable?
No, they should be identical. If there's a difference, then there's a
bug - which, i
On 04/10/2015 03:14 AM, Alex Velenko wrote:
On 09/03/15 17:40, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/09/15 03:53, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Alex Velenko wrote:
For example, in arm testcase pr43920-2.c, CSE previously decided not
to put
an "obvious" note on insn 9, as set value wa
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
wrote:
> On 04/23/2015 05:12 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>
>> On 04/20/2015 10:36 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> Implementation is pretty straightforward. The only catch is that the
>> middle-end doesn't actually assume that REFERENCE_TYPEs are non
On 02/05/2015 05:18 PM, Alan Modra wrote:
On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 08:59:01PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
Thanks, I'll use it directly now and have a patch in the works to tidy
m32c.c and rs6000.c.
As threatened, the emit-rtl tidy. Besides adding a couple of
accessors, I've moved x_first_insn and
On 01/16/2015 12:13 AM, Venkataramanan Kumar wrote:
The below test case which I am working on is from the PR63949
int subsi_sxth (int a, short i)
{
/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "sub\tw\[0-9\]+,.*sxth #?1" } } */
return a - ((int)i << 1);
}
The expression "a - ((int)i << 1)" is not a
Hi,
this patch adds necessary code to match thunks (that is rather easy to do).
Firefox currently duoes not build for me with mainline (for syntax errors)
so I did not test how much effect the patch has in practice.
Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, will commit it shortly.
* ipa-icf.c
Hi,
I checked this patch into gcc-5-branch.
H.J.
---
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 222386)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2015-04-23 H.J. Lu
+
+ * DEV-PHASE: Set to prerelease.
+
2015-04-2
As discussed in the PR, the "initialized field with side-effects overwritten"
warning is sometimes not so useful, so it probably makes sense to provide an
option so that users are able to specifically enable/disable it. Since the
warning is enabled by default at present, it is enabled by default e
This is a minor cleanup patch for MIPS. A number of floating point madd type
instructions set the accum_in attribute. But this attribute is only used
for integer madd instructions, so this patch removes it from the floating
point madd instructions where it is not needed or used.
The 'accum_in' a
On 04/22/2015 12:36 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Currently, we warn if the right operand of a shift expression is negative,
or greater than or equal to the length in bits of the promoted left operand.
But we don't warn when we see a left shift of a negative value. That is
undefined behavior since C
On 04/21/2015 04:00 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
A trivial patch to use OPT_* where they belong.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2015-04-21 Marek Polacek
PR c/65830
* c-common.c (c_fully_fold_internal): Use OPT_Wshift_count_negative
and OPT_Wshift_c
On 04/21/2015 05:16 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This patch improves -Wlogical-op so that it also warns about cases such as
P && P or P || P. I made use of what merge_ranges computes: if we have equal
operands with the same ranges, warn -- that seems to work well.
(-Wlogical-op still isn't enabled n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Dear Gerald,
Thanks for processing the patch!
Best regards,
On 4/23/15 11:49 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, Tim Semeijn wrote:
>> We have changed our company name, hostnames and contact
>> information. Please remove the current B
On 03/23/2015 10:35 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
Hello All:
Did you get a chance to look at the below patch.
Thanks & Regards
Ajit
-Original Message-
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On
Behalf Of Ajit Kumar Agarwal
Sent: Wednesday, March 04,
On 04/22/2015 07:56 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This patch stifles -Wlogical-op a bit: don't warn if either operand comes from
a macro expansion. As the comment says, it doesn't fix the bug completely, but
it's a simple improvement. I did this by introducing a new macro.
Bootstrapped/regtested on
On 04/23/2015 02:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
Hi,
already approved, maybe it could be already checked in outside of the series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01298.html
With the patches so far after
(gdb) set debug compile 1
one would get:
searching for
On 04/23/2015 02:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
Hi,
already approved, reposting just to keep it a part of the series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01299.html
As discussed in
How to use compile & execute function in GDB
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2015-04
On 04/23/2015 02:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
Hi,
already approved, reposting just to keep it a part of the series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01301.html
As discussed in
How to use compile & execute function in GDB
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2015-04
On 04/23/2015 02:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
Hi,
in mail thread
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-04/msg00804.html
the idea of breaking libcc1.so compatibility was rejected.
Therefore this patch series implements full backward/forward GCC/GDB ABI
compatibility.
Jan
include
On Fri, 17 Apr 2015, Tim Semeijn wrote:
> We have changed our company name, hostnames and contact information.
> Please remove the current BBLN mirror (mirror.bbln.org) and replace it
> with our three new ones:
The patch below implements those changes:
- Replace mirror.bbln.org by mirror1.babylo
This PR points out a problem with enum forward declarations (so C++ is out as
these are forbidden in C++). If we forward declare an enum, and later on
declare the enum with __attribute__ ((packed)), the attribute is ignored. The
reason is that when we first see the forward declaration, parser_xr
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 22:38:34 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> Unfortunately this changes libcc1 API in an incompatible way. There is
> a possibility of a hack to keep the API the same - one could pass "-v" option
> explicitly to set_arguments(), set_arguments() could compare the "-v" string
> and pr
Hi,
already approved, maybe it could be already checked in outside of the series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01298.html
With the patches so far after
(gdb) set debug compile 1
one would get:
searching for compiler matching regex
^(x86_64|i.86)(-[^-]*)?-
Hi,
already approved, reposting just to keep it a part of the series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01299.html
As discussed in
How to use compile & execute function in GDB
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2015-04/msg00026.html
GDB currently searches for /usr/
Hi,
in mail thread
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-04/msg00804.html
the idea of breaking libcc1.so compatibility was rejected.
Therefore this patch series implements full backward/forward GCC/GDB ABI
compatibility.
Jan
include/ChangeLog
2015-04-23 Jan Kratochvil
Hi,
already approved, reposting just to keep it a part of the series:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01301.html
As discussed in
How to use compile & execute function in GDB
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2015-04/msg00026.html
GDB currently searches for /usr/
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 05:16:19PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > the target option side (for SWITCHABLE_TARGET). Do not record
> > any target options in the lto_opts section.
> >
> > Honza - I suppose we don't have any testcase that this works, I'll
> > try to come up with sth. This also looks l
Steve Munroe was tuning an application on PowerPC, and needed to set the
-msave-toc-indirect option for only one function, and it wasn't available via
the #praga/attribute target options. This patch adds support for the
additional options that don't involve an ABI change to the list of options tha
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 17:16 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 08:43:10AM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > > Maybe you can fold tabortdc with tabortwc now? Use one UNSPEC name
> > > for both, :GPR and ?
> >
> > Wouldn't that change the tabortwc pattern to use DImode rather
This patch adds CFI directives to the soft floating point support code for ARM.
Previously, if we tried to do a backtrace from that code in a debug session we'd
get something like this:
(gdb) bt
#0 __nedf2 () at
../../../../../../gcc-4.9.2/libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S:1082
#1 0x0db6 in _
Very delayed answer, sorry...
Ajit Kumar Agarwal writes:
> Hello All:
>
> The changes are made in the patch to update the heuristics for loop
> invariant for address arithemetic at RTL Level. The heuristics are
> updated with the consideration of single def and use for register
> pressure calcul
The following patch was backported to gcc-5 branch.
The patch was bootstrapped on x86-64.
Committed as rev. 222383.
2015-04-23 Vladimir Makarov
Backport from trunk r23.
2015-04-19 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/65805
* lra-eliminations.c (
On 04/23/2015 11:34 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
It seems also weird we do not warn directly for '*(int *)0' in the C/C++
FE.
Agreed.
Using decl_with_nonnull_addr_p doesn't make sense for reference variables,
since we're using their pointer value rather than their address.
Is an extra che
On 23/04/15 17:36, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
This patch undoes the PR65780 performance regressions on a few targets
I have tested to work fine.
This PR was about an access to uninitialized COMMON symbol defined in
executable (or PIE) where there is a normal symbol definition in a shared
library
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On March 23, 2015 8:54:54 PM GMT+01:00, Jakub Jelinek
> wrote:
>>Hi!
>>
>>On the following testcase we ICE, because we don't verify we have the
>>ERF_RETURNS_ARG argument, on non-verified builtins that is possible.
>>Other uses of ERF_RETU
Hi,
The recently released POWER ISA 2.07B replaced Category:Vector.Crypto
with Category:Vector.AES and Category:Vector.SHA2, which outdated the
description of the -mcrypto option. This patch fixes that. Verified on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu, committed as obvious.
Thanks,
Bill
2015-04-23 Bill Sch
Hi Mikael, hi all,
thanks for the review. I have made some changes. Answers to your questions are
inline below.
On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:01:23 +0200
Mikael Morin wrote:
> > I was pointed to the patch in comment #44 of pr61831 which seemingly fixes
> > the #3 comment of pr58586, too, but causes a
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> We try to strip attributes that aren't reflected in mangling from template
> arguments, but were failing to do that in this case. Fixed by making
> strip_typedefs strip such attributes as well.
>
> Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to tru
[resending due to mail client messing up.]
Hi all,
The EON instruction can be expressed either by (xor (not a) b) or (not (xor
a b)),
simplify-rtx canonicalizes to the second form and we have a pattern for it
(*xor_one_cmpl3) but we don't have a pattern for the shifted operand
version. This patc
Hi!
On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 19:42:43 +0100, Julian Brown
wrote:
> This patch is an attempt to fix some potential race conditions with
> accesses to shared data structures from multiple concurrent threads in
> libgomp's OpenACC entry points. The main change is to move locking out
> of lookup_host and
Hi!
This patch undoes the PR65780 performance regressions on a few targets
I have tested to work fine.
This PR was about an access to uninitialized COMMON symbol defined in
executable (or PIE) where there is a normal symbol definition in a shared
library. The PR65780 fix that got committed stoppe
Hi,
while comitting previous patch, I frogot the attached change that exports
attribute_value_equal.
Comitted and my apologize for breakage.
Honza
* tree.h (attribute_value_equal): Declare.
* tree.c (attribute_value_equal): Export.
Index: tree.h
===
We try to strip attributes that aren't reflected in mangling from
template arguments, but were failing to do that in this case. Fixed by
making strip_typedefs strip such attributes as well.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit 2068bd13c95465ece265d46daa0f9e3c3c4e2f8e
Author: J
On 04/01/2015 12:36 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
This testcase started crashing because the added call to
check_explicit_specialization does a SET_DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION
which wasn't happening previously, and then determine_visibility assumes
that if DECL_USE_TEMPLATE is set, so is DECL_TEMPLAT
In general, TYPE_CANONICAL of a type strips all attributes. An
exception to this seems to be that TYPE_REF_CAN_ALIAS_ALL remains set on
the TYPE_CANONICAL of a pointer/reference type even though its TREE_TYPE
no longer has the may_alias attribute, and is inconsistent with
"affects_type_identit
On 04/23/2015 05:12 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 04/20/2015 10:36 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
Implementation is pretty straightforward. The only catch is that the
middle-end doesn't actually assume that REFERENCE_TYPEs are non-NULL so
code like
int &a = *(int *)0;
if (&a != 0)
will warn th
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> > It looks like when transitioning to using target and optimization
> > option nodes for compile-time to link-time option streaming you
> > didn't adjust lto-opts.c nor lto-wrapper.c. The following fixes
>
> Yep, I assumed that lto-wrapper's merging
Hi,
this patch introduces sem_item::compare_attributes that is based on
comp_type_attributes, just simpler. We can clearly be a lot smarter if we
started annotating attributes with a safety WRT various transformations, but I
am not sure we care. I think it may make more sense to actually lower the
Hi,
Between the time my unaligned-loads patch was approved and trunk
reopened for business, another test showed up that needs to be cleaned
up in the same way as the others. This patch does that. Verified on
powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu, committed as obvious.
Thanks,
Bill
2015-04-23 Bill Sc
>
> It looks like when transitioning to using target and optimization
> option nodes for compile-time to link-time option streaming you
> didn't adjust lto-opts.c nor lto-wrapper.c. The following fixes
Yep, I assumed that lto-wrapper's merging is now redundant for optimization
options, while it
On 04/20/2015 10:36 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
+ if (decl_with_nonnull_addr_p (inner))
Using decl_with_nonnull_addr_p doesn't make sense for reference
variables, since we're using their pointer value rather than their address.
+ warning_at (location,
+
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch improves the vc patterns in neon.md to use proper RTL
> operations rather than UNSPECS.
> It is done in a similar way to the analogous aarch64 operations i.e. vceq is
> expressed as
> (neg (eq (...) (...)))
> since we
On Wed, 22 Apr 2015, Petar Jovanovic wrote:
> > I think this will best be
> > reduced to a link-only test on bare iron, hoping for a link failure.
>
> I am not sure how we can reduce the test to a link failure (today), if
> ld will not report an error (today).
Me neither, offhand; hopefully so
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Kwok Cheung Yeung
wrote:
> This is a simple patch that ensures that a .size directive is emitted when
> space is allocated for a static variable in the BSS on bare-metal ARM
> targets. This allows other tools such as GDB to look up the size of the
> object correct
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 05:58:39PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Attached is a minimal patch to get at least a trivial OpenMP 4.0 testcase
> offloading to NVPTX (the first patch). The second patch is WIP, just first
> few needed changes to make libgomp to build for NVPTX (several weeks of work
> a
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 06:37:48PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This is not a regression, so not sure if I shouldn't defer this patch to the
> next stage1 at this juncture...
I've committed this patch now after another regtest/bootstrap (x86_64-linux).
Marek
Hi!
Marek Polacek writes:
> This patch stifles -Wlogical-op a bit: don't warn if either operand
> comes from a macro expansion. As the comment says, it doesn't fix the
> bug completely, but it's a simple improvement.
I cannot approve this patch, but for what it's worth, I like it and
would vot
Hi Guys,
I am applying the patch below as an obvious fix for come compile time
warning messages building the rl78 toolchain.
Cheers
Nick
gcc/ChangeLog
2015-04-23 Nick Clifton
* config/rl78/rl78.c (rl78_preferred_reload_class): Add
ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED to x parameter.
Hi Jan-Benedict.
../../../gcc/gcc/config/rl78/rl78.c:390:14: error: enumeration value ‘MUL_RL78’
not handled in switch [-Werror=switch]
switch (rl78_mul_type)
../../../gcc/gcc/config/rl78/rl78.c:4649:34: error: unused parameter ‘x’
[-Werror=unused-parameter]
rl78_preferred_reload_
Ping !
On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 11:03:30 +0200
Andre Vehreschild wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> during debugging of a larger fortran source I figured that my previous patch
> on 44672 had still some issues, when it comes to adding a gfc_code into the
> chain of codes and with a symbol. Adding a new gfc_code obj
It looks like when transitioning to using target and optimization
option nodes for compile-time to link-time option streaming you
didn't adjust lto-opts.c nor lto-wrapper.c. The following fixes
the target option side (for SWITCHABLE_TARGET). Do not record
any target options in the lto_opts secti
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 10:58:22AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 23/04/15 10:08, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >On 23/04/15 09:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> >>On 23/04/15 09:35, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Trevor Saunders
> >>>wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at
Hi Paul, hi all,
Paul, thanks for the review. I have commited this as r222361.
Regards,
Andre
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 21:13:31 +0200
Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> The delta patch is OK for trunk and eventual backport to 5.2.
>
> Thanks for all the hard work
>
> Paul
>
> On
Revised patch, supporting linker that aligns the toc base.
This fixes a thinko in offsettable_ok_by_alignment. It's not the
absolute placement that matters, but the toc-pointer relative offset.
So alignment of r2 also needs to be taken into account.
Changing offsettable_ok_by_alignment has a rip
This patch removes copyprop passes run immediately after CCP. This
uncovered that I failed to implement copyprop properly for PHI nodes
(due to the "clever" using UNDEFINED as initial value to meet PHI
args into and me not wanting to enable optimistic copy-prop just yet).
Fixed together with the
On 27/02/15 09:41, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 19/02/15 12:19, Matthew Wahab wrote:
The LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS macro is only needed for reload. Since the
ARM backend no longer supports reload, this macro is not needed and this
patch removes it.
This is OK for stage 1.
Committed as r222359
Ping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00232.html
Thanks,
Kyrill
On 04/02/15 12:12, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
This patch improves the vc patterns in neon.md to use proper RTL
operations rather than UNSPECS.
It is done in a similar way to the analogous aarch64 operations i.e.
vc
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 23/04/15 10:08, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>>
>> On 23/04/15 09:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23/04/15 09:35, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Trevor Saunders
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 23,
On 14/04/15 20:10, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
The load/store-multiple expanders reject a number of registers outside of
[2-14]
but the arm_gen_{load,store}_multiple functions that they called down to
have an even
stricter restric
On 14/04/15 20:09, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
This is an update to
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg02706.html,
rebased on top of the new cores that went in since that time.
It's just a refactoring.
Bootstrapped an
Hi!
Committed to gomp-4_0-branch in r222355:
commit 167d175e949c2360c080d27c8a6c9a461e92ba9e
Merge: d9af23c 0c57c0f
Author: tschwinge
Date: Thu Apr 23 10:01:43 2015 +
svn merge -r 221638:221877 svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc
On 23/04/15 10:08, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 23/04/15 09:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 23/04/15 09:35, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 04:27:59AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:24:44PM +0100, Tr
This causes libmpx to fail the configure stage on my build hosts because 'xg++'
was invoked with the bogus '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' flag, and the fallback
preprocessor '/lib/cpp' did not exist on my systems.
Since libmpx has no C++ code, requiring a C++ preprocessor and compiler at
configure
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> 2015-04-15 Thomas Preud'homme
> Steven Bosscher
>
> * cprop.c (cprop_reg_p): New.
> (hash_scan_set): Use above function to check if register can be
> propagated.
> (find_avail_s
On 23/04/15 09:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 23/04/15 09:35, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Trevor Saunders
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 04:27:59AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:24:44PM +0100, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> On
On 23/04/15 09:53, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 22/04/15 09:42, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
Case pr42172-1.c failed on pre-armv7 processors because GCC actually
generates better code without ldr instruction. This patch just refines
test
case by checking
On 23/04/15 09:52, Terry Guo wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 23/04/15 09:25, Terry Guo wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
Hi Terry,
On 23/04/15 02:56, Terry Guo wrote:
/* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-march=armv6-m
On 16 March 2012 at 11:04, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:35:47PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:57:12PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> >On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 22/04/15 09:42, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> Case pr42172-1.c failed on pre-armv7 processors because GCC actually
>> generates better code without ldr instruction. This patch just refines
>> test
>> case by checking str instead of ldr
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 23/04/15 09:25, Terry Guo wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Kyrill Tkachov
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Terry,
>>>
>>> On 23/04/15 02:56, Terry Guo wrote:
/* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-march=armv6-m -
This is some enablement part for fixing PR62283 (and some code TLC).
I'm pushing this (esp. the stmt placement bits and the cost model
changes) separately to ease bisecting in case of problems.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2015-04-23 Richard B
On 23/04/15 09:35, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 04:27:59AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:24:44PM +0100, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 04:14:01PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On 23/04/15 09:25, Terry Guo wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi Terry,
On 23/04/15 02:56, Terry Guo wrote:
/* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-march=armv6-m -mthumb -O3 -w -mfloat-abi=soft" } */
+/* { dg-options "-mthumb -O2 -mfloat-abi=soft" } */
I
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
