Re: [PATCH 06/10] Track expression ranges in C frontend

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: As in the previous version of this patch "Implement tree expression tracking in C FE (v2)" the patch now captures ranges for all C expressions during parsing within a new field of c_expr, and for all tree nodes with a location_t, it stores them in ad

Re: [PATCH 08/10] Wire things up so that libcpp users get token underlines

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: A previous patch introduced the ability to print one or more ranges for a diagnostic via a rich_location class. Another patch generalized source_location (aka location_t) to be both a caret and a range, and generated range information for all tokens c

Re: [PATCH 10/10] Compress short ranges into source_location

On 10/23/2015 02:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/ada/ChangeLog: * gcc-interface/trans.c (Sloc_to_locus): Add line_table param when calling linemap_position_for_line_and_column. gcc/ChangeLog: * input.c (dump_line_table_statistics): Dump stats on how many ranges w

Re: [PATCH 0/4] -Wmisleading-indentation

On 10/29/2015 11:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: David Malcolm writes: * adds -Wmisleading-indentation to -Wall I have doubts this is a good idea. I'm sure this will break a bazillion packages which (misguidedly) ship with -Wall -Werror. Would be better to leave the user the choice, given that

Re: [PATCH 0/4] -Wmisleading-indentation

David Malcolm writes: > > * adds -Wmisleading-indentation to -Wall I have doubts this is a good idea. I'm sure this will break a bazillion packages which (misguidedly) ship with -Wall -Werror. Would be better to leave the user the choice, given that such a thing was historically never checked

Re: [PATCH 1/6]tree-ssa-dom.c: Normalize exprs, starting with ARRAY_REF to MEM_REF

On 10/29/2015 01:18 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote: This patch just teaches DOM that ARRAY_REFs can be equivalent to MEM_REFs (with pointer type to the array element type). gcc/ChangeLog: * tree-ssa-dom.c (dom_normalize_single_rhs): New. (dom_normalize_gimple_stmt): New. (looku

Re: [PATCH 4/6][Trivial] tree-sra.c: A few comment fixes/additions.

On 10/29/2015 01:18 PM, Alan Lawrence wrote: gcc/ChangeLog: * tree-sra.c (scalarizable_type_p): Comment variable-length arrays. (completely_scalarize): Comment zero-length arrays. (get_access_replacement): Correct comment re. precondition. Trivially OK :-) jeff

Re: [PATCH] New attribute to create target clones

On 10/29/2015 12:13 PM, Evgeny Stupachenko wrote: On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >>Yes. This is not necessary. However that way we'll have the following >>code in dispatcher: >> cmpl$6, __cpu_model+4(%rip) >> sete%al >> movzbl %al, %eax >>

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

On 10/27/2015 01:58 PM, David Malcolm wrote: On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 15:48 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: [...snip...] Looks like [Patch 02/16] was too big (1.2MB) for the list; it can be seen here: https://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/gcc/2015-10-27/unittests/0002-Add-embedded-copy-of-gtest-1.7-to-unit

Re: [PATCH 01/16] Add unittest infrastructure

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/plugin/plugin.exp (plugin_test_list): Add the unittests plugin. * g++.dg/plugin/unittests.C: New file. * gcc.dg/plugin/plugin.exp (plugin_test_list): Add the unittests plugin.

Re: [PATCH 07/16] Add test-functions.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-functions.c: New file. There's some if (0) code in here that needs to be eliminated. The RTL case in particular is probably stretching the limits of what we can do with the framework right now. Or m

Re: [PATCH 16/16] Add test-wide-int.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-wide-int.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 15/16] Add test-vec.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-vec.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 12/16] Add test-locations.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-locations.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Consider removing the stuff we aren't

Re: [PATCH 08/16] Add test-ggc.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-ggc.c: New file. Not terribly happy with that counter to used to create a big list to detect recursion. But I'm not offhand sure how to avoid without exposing more of the ggc system that is wise. O

Re: [PATCH 06/16] Add test-folding.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-folding.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 09/16] Add test-gimple.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-gimple.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-gimple.c | 178 ++ 1 file changed, 178 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-gimple.c

Re: [PATCH 14/16] Add test-tree.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-tree.c: New file. Same general comments as the RTL tests. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved.

Re: [PATCH 13/16] Add test-rtl.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-rtl.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-rtl.c | 94 ++ 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-rtl.c diff --g

Re: [PATCH 10/16] Add test-hash-map.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-hash-map.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 11/16] Add test-hash-set.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-hash-set.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 4b] diagnostic-show-locus.c changes: Insertions

On 10/28/2015 12:09 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/ChangeLog: * diagnostic-show-locus.c (struct point_state): New struct. (class colorizer): New class. (class layout_point): New class. (class layout_range): New class. (class layout): New class. (color

Re: [PATCH 04/10] Reimplement diagnostic_show_locus, introducing rich_location classes (v5)

On 10/28/2015 12:09 PM, David Malcolm wrote: If you have a blob of new code and a blob of deletes, even breaking it down that way may help in this case (ie, a patch with new classes & code, then a pass that deletes old crud we're not going to use anymore). I've split patch 4 of the kit into 3

Re: [PATCH 8/9] ENABLE_CHECKING refactoring: target-specific parts

On 10/29/2015 10:10 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/05/2015 05:40 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: gcc/ChangeLog: 2015-10-05 Mikhail Maltsev * config/alpha/alpha.c (alpha_function_arg): Use gcc_checking_assert. * config/arm/arm.c (arm_unwind_emit_sequence): Adjust to use CHECKING_P. * confi

Re: [PATCH 8/9] ENABLE_CHECKING refactoring: target-specific parts

On 10/05/2015 05:40 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: gcc/ChangeLog: 2015-10-05 Mikhail Maltsev * config/alpha/alpha.c (alpha_function_arg): Use gcc_checking_assert. * config/arm/arm.c (arm_unwind_emit_sequence): Adjust to use CHECKING_P. * config/bfin/bfin.c (hwloop_optimiz

Re: [PATCH 05/16] Add test-et-forest.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-et-forest.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. Jeff

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

On 10/29/2015 04:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote: On Oct 29, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote: Something similar for RTL would be cool, but probably even harder given the amount of state that's traditionally been kept out of the IL stream. I'm sure some things are better today than in the past, but i

Re: [PATCH] New attribute to create target clones

> Ok. I've modified the patch correspondingly. Thanks, the IPA/callgarph parts of the patch looks fine to me except for a typo: +/* Create sting with attributes separated by comma. + Return number of attributes. */ and a fact that sometimes you skip vertical whitespace after variable declarati

[libgomp] remove some unneeded args

The offload execution function doesn't need the sizes and kinds vectors describing the offloaded data -- that's already been handled and the vector of host and device addresses is sufficient. This patch removes those arguments. As we've already decided that we don't have to deal with version

[patch committed SH] Fix help text for -mfdpic

I've committed the attached obvious patch to fix FAIL: compiler driver --help=target option(s): "^ +-.*[^:.]$" absent from output: " -mfdpic Generate ELF FDPIC code" popping up after SH fdpic patch applied. Regards, kaz -- 2015-10-29 Kaz Kojima * config

[openacc] on_device fix

acc_on_device and it's builtin had a conflict. The function formally takes an enum argument, but the builtin takes an int -- primarily to avoid the compiler having to generate the enum type internally. This works fine for C, where the external declaration of the function (in openacc.h) matc

[PATCH] PR fortran/68154 -- repair damage done byfix for PR fortran/65429

The attached patch restores 3 lines of code removed in my fix for PR fortran/65429. The code now checks for a NULL character length in the typespec. If it is indeed NULL, gfortran will look for a valid constructor to use (ie., the 3 lines of code). It is somewhat surprising that it took 6 months

[OpenACC] num_gangs, num_workers and vector_length in c++

I noticed that num_gangs, num_workers and vector_length are parsed in somewhat insistent ways in the c++ FE. Both vector_length and num_gangs bail out whenever as soon as they detect errors, whereas num_workers does not. Besides for that, they are also checking for integral expressions as the argum

Re: [AArch64] Add scheduling and cost models for Exynos M1

Hi, James. On 10/28/2015 05:36 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:12:48PM -0500, Evandro Menezes wrote: This patch adds the scheduling and cost models for Exynos M1. Though it?s a rather large patch, much of it is the DFA model for the pipeline.? Still, I?d appreciate any f

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

On Oct 29, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > Something similar for RTL would be cool, but probably even harder given the > amount of state that's traditionally been kept out of the IL stream. I'm > sure some things are better today than in the past, but it's probably a very > tanged mess to

Re: [PATCH 04/16] Add test-cfg.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-cfg.c: New file. --- gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-cfg.c | 319 + 1 file changed, 319 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/unittests/test-cfg.c diff --

Re: [PATCH 03/16] Add test-bitmap.c to unittests

On 10/27/2015 01:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * unittests/test-bitmap.c: New file. OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved. jeff

Re: [PATCH 8/9] ENABLE_CHECKING refactoring: target-specific parts

On 10/05/2015 05:40 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: gcc/ChangeLog: 2015-10-05 Mikhail Maltsev * config/alpha/alpha.c (alpha_function_arg): Use gcc_checking_assert. * config/arm/arm.c (arm_unwind_emit_sequence): Adjust to use CHECKING_P. * config/bfin/bfin.c (hwloop_optimiz

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #9 (enable __float128 by default on VSX systems)

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 09:02:22AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 06:31:41PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote: > > Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/float128-1.c > > === > > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc

[PATCH] Remove unnecessary invalidation support in threading

With the recent change to rely on the FSM bits to handle threading backedges, there's no way to get into record_temporary_equivalences_from_stmts_at_dest after following a backedge. Thus that argument can be removed and everywhere it was used can be simplified assuming its value was false.

[gomp4] openacc reduction simplification

I've committed this to gomp4. It removes a no-longer needed field from omp_context & simplifies the dummy head/tail generation needed for reductions at the outermost level. Also incorporates the simplification I committed to trunk earlier today. nathan 2015-10-29 Nathan Sidwell * omp

[gomp4] acc_on_device

I've committed this to gomp4 branch. It resolves a problem with builtin_acc_on_device and C++. The builtin's arg is an int, but the acc_on_device fn shoud take enum acc_device_t. In C++ a prototype int Foo (enum X); fails to match up with a builtin of type int Foo (int); We'd worked arou

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/36192 -- yet another fix for an ICE

Am 29.10.2015 um 19:35 schrieb Steve Kargl: The patch for PR fortran/36192 that I committed here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2015-10/msg02160.html cured an ICE for a testcase that was reduced from the originally submitted mutilated Fortran code. The original code could in fact invoke ano

Re: [PATCH 8/9] ENABLE_CHECKING refactoring: target-specific parts

On 10/06/2015 06:48 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/06/2015 01:40 AM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: -#ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING +#if CHECKING_P /* Check that the addresses are consecutive. */ e = XEXP (SET_DEST (e), 0); if (GET_CODE (e) == PLUS) diff --git a/gcc/config/bfin/bfin.c

Re: [PATCH] libitm: Support sized delete.

On 10/29/2015 11:19 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote: > diff --git a/libitm/libitm.map b/libitm/libitm.map > index 21bcfdf..7fc9a41 100644 > --- a/libitm/libitm.map > +++ b/libitm/libitm.map > @@ -168,10 +168,12 @@ LIBITM_1.0 { > _ZGTtnw?; > _ZGTtna?; > _ZGTtdlPv; > + _ZGTtdlPv?; >

Re: [AArch64] Add scheduling and cost models for Exynos M1

Hi, Kyrill. True dat, I missed arm-tune.md. And, yes, bootstrapped cross and natively on AArch64 and cross on ARM. Thank you, -- Evandro Menezes On 10/28/2015 05:57 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: Hi Evandro, On 27/10/15 23:12, Evandro Menezes wrote: This patch adds the scheduling and cost model

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

On 10/29/2015 10:10 AM, David Malcolm wrote: There may be useful things in gtest for us that I'm not using yet. For example, the support for death tests may be useful for testing that e.g. our checking macros kill the program sanely in the presence of malformed internal data. Please check on th

[PATCH 0/6 v2] PR/63679 Make SRA scalarize constant-pool loads

This is a revision of previous series at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg01485.html , and follows on from the first two patches of that series, which have been pushed already. A few things have happened since. The previous patch 3, making SRA generate ARRAY_REFS, is removed. As Marti

[PATCH 3/6] Share code from fold_array_ctor_reference with fold.

This is in response to https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2015-10/msg00097.html, where Richi points out that CONSTRUCTOR elements are not necessarily ordered. I wasn't sure of a good naming convention for the new get_ctor_element_at_index, other suggestions welcome. gcc/ChangeLog: * gimple-fold.

[PATCH 4/6][Trivial] tree-sra.c: A few comment fixes/additions.

gcc/ChangeLog: * tree-sra.c (scalarizable_type_p): Comment variable-length arrays. (completely_scalarize): Comment zero-length arrays. (get_access_replacement): Correct comment re. precondition. --- gcc/tree-sra.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) d

[PATCH 6/6] Make SRA replace constant-pool loads

This has changed quite a bit since the previous revision (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg01484.html), mostly due to Ada and specifically Ada on ARM. I didn't find a good alternative to scanning for constant-pool accesses "as we go" through the function, and although I didn't find an

Re: [PATCH 00/16] Unit tests framework (v3)

On 10/28/2015 05:38 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/27/2015 08:48 PM, David Malcolm wrote: The following patch kit adds a unit tests framework for gcc, as a new subdirectory below gcc/testsuite. So, as a general comment I think this would be a very good thing to have, and from a quick look thro

[PATCH 5/6]tree-sra.c: Fix completely_scalarize for negative array indices

The code I added to completely_scalarize for arrays isn't right in some cases of negative array indices (e.g. arrays with indices from -1 to 1 in the Ada testsuite). On ARM, this prevents a failure bootstrapping Ada with the next patch, as well as a few ACATS tests (e.g. c64106a). Some discussion

[PATCH 2/6] tree-ssa-dom.c: Normalize data types in MEM_REFs.

This makes dom2 identify e.g. MEM[(int[8] *)...] with MEM[(int *)...]. These are not generally equivalent as they have different aliasing behaviour but they have the same value as far as dom is concerned and so this helps find more equivalences. There is some question over the best policy here, bu

[PATCH 1/6]tree-ssa-dom.c: Normalize exprs, starting with ARRAY_REF to MEM_REF

This patch just teaches DOM that ARRAY_REFs can be equivalent to MEM_REFs (with pointer type to the array element type). gcc/ChangeLog: * tree-ssa-dom.c (dom_normalize_single_rhs): New. (dom_normalize_gimple_stmt): New. (lookup_avail_expr): Call dom_normalize_gimple_stmt.

Re: [PATCH v2] [PR debug/67192] Fix C loops' back-jump location

On Thu, Oct 29 2015, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 10/23/2015 11:14 AM, Andreas Arnez wrote: >> + bool is_braced = c_parser_next_token_is (parser, CPP_OPEN_BRACE); >> body = c_parser_c99_block_statement (parser); >> + location_t iter_loc = is_braced ? input_location : loc; >> >> token_indent

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #9 (enable __float128 by default on VSX systems)

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > There probably should be an effective-target for float128. Yes, as I said in there needs to be standard test boilerplate to: disable a test if __float128 isn't supported at all even with

Fix target/68124

My fix for PR 67609 caused problems for -m32 -march=corei7, a combination that I hadn't tested. My feeling is that for post-reload splitters that want to frob a register to a different mode, we ought to use something more specific than gen_lowpart. Perhaps adjust_reg_mode, or perhaps something ne

Re: [gomp4] revert num_gangs, num_workers, vector_length and num_threads parser changes in c/c++

On 10/29/2015 07:08 AM, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > In gomp-4_0-branch, we've tried to consolidate the parsing all of the > clauses of the form > > foo (int-expression) > > into a single c*_parser_omp_positive_int_clause function. At the time, > such clauses included num_gangs, num_workers, vect

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR66313

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > We still regress gcc.dg/tree-ssa/tailrecursion-6.c with it though. > There we have > > int > foo (int a) > { > if (a) > return a * (2 * (foo (a - 1))) + a + 1; > else > return 0; > } > > and tailrecursio

[PATCH] PR fortran/36192 -- yet another fix for an ICE

The patch for PR fortran/36192 that I committed here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2015-10/msg02160.html cured an ICE for a testcase that was reduced from the originally submitted mutilated Fortran code. The original code could in fact invoke another ICE. This patch cures that ICE. The pat

[PATCH] libitm: Support sized delete.

This patch supports the sized variants of operator delete. Tested on x86_64-linux. Is this OK or is it completely sufficient to just call non-sized operator delete from libitm even if the program has a sized delete? (If the latter is the case, I would just remove the special handling for that and

Go patch committed: Drop zero field from type descriptors

The gc Go library added a zero field to type descriptors for use by maps. It was added to gccgo in a library updated a while back, although gccgo never used it. The gc library has since dropped it. This patch removes it from gccgo. This is in preparation for an update to the Go 1.5 library. Boo

Re: [PATCH] New attribute to create target clones

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> Yes. This is not necessary. However that way we'll have the following >> code in dispatcher: >> cmpl$6, __cpu_model+4(%rip) >> sete%al >> movzbl %al, %eax >> testl %eax, %eax >> jle .L16 >

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 13:35 -0400, Patrick Palka wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran > > into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably > > not misleading. > > > > In regr

[gomp4.5] Allow non-static data members in shared clause

Hi! This patch adds support for non-static data members in shared clause. The clause is after checking the constraints removed during the gimplification, this in GCC can be firstprivate even with default(none) and that is the best implementation for shared on the members. We won't diagnose non-sta

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:56 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Mike Stump wrote: >> On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:42 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: >>> However we should definitely not warn on >>> >>> if (foo) >>> bar (); >>> >>> { >>> baz (); >>> } >>> >>> Since

AW: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

-Original-Nachricht- Betreff: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines Datum: 2015-10-29T17:49:38+0100 Von: "David Malcolm" > In each case, a blank line separated the guarded code from followup code > that wasn't guarded, a

[gomp4.5] Fix checking ICE with atomic in a template

Hi! This patch fixes an ICE, where c_finish_omp_atomic is called on a template for diagnostics purposes because the expressions aren't type dependent, but still calling save_expr on C++ trees is harmful (e.g. SCOPE_REF contains a type as one of the arguments, rather than expression). 2015-10-29

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:42 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: >> However we should definitely not warn on >> >>if (foo) >> bar (); >> >> { >>baz (); >> } >> >> Since that is valid GNU-style code :) > > I’ll put it differently; n

Re: [PATCH], PowerPC IEEE 128-bit patch #7 (revised #2), Subpatch #06

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:33:48AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Michael Meissner > wrote: > > This patch sets up all of the emulation functions. > > > > I have built the compiler with this patch and the previous subpatches > > (1-4). I > > have bootstrapped the

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:42 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: > However we should definitely not warn on > >if (foo) > bar (); > > { >baz (); > } > > Since that is valid GNU-style code :) I’ll put it differently; no, that formatting is wrong.

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On 10/29/2015 11:42 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguab

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >> Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran >> into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably >> not misleading. >> >> In regrename.

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add -Wmisleading-indentation to -Wall

On 10/29/2015 10:49 AM, David Malcolm wrote: Our documentation describes -Wall as enabling "all the warnings about constructions that some users consider questionable, and that are easy to avoid (or modify to prevent the warning), even in conjunction with macros." I believe that -Wmisleading-ind

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:49 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran > into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably > not misleading. > > In regrename.c:scan_rtx_address: > > 1308 case PRE_MODIFY: > 1309

Re: [PATCH 3/4] Fix misleading indentation in tree-nested.c

On 10/29/2015 10:49 AM, David Malcolm wrote: tree-nested.c has this code: 2333 for (c = gimple_omp_taskreg_clauses (stmt); 2334 c; 2335 c = OMP_CLAUSE_CHAIN (c)) 2336if ((OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (c) == OMP_CLAUSE_FIRSTPRIVATE

Re: [PATCH 2/4] Fix misleading indentation in tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c

On 10/29/2015 10:49 AM, David Malcolm wrote: tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c has this bad indentation at line 452: 449if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS)) 450 fprintf (dump_file, ";; Not unswitching, loop is not expected" 451 " to iterate\n");

Re: [PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

On 10/29/2015 10:49 AM, David Malcolm wrote: Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably not misleading. In regrename.c:scan_rtx_address: 1308 case PRE_MODIFY: 1309/* If the targ

Re: [PATCH] lra: Don't remove the scratch in (mem:BLK (scratch))

On 10/29/2015 12:40 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: LRA wants to replace SCRATCH registers with real registers. It should not do that with (mem:BLK (scratch)), which is special, not really a scratch register. I don't know if this patch handles this in the best place to handle it; I don't even kno

[PATCH] [ARM] neon-testgen.ml typo

I noticed a comment typo in this file while using grep to look for other stuff. The typo is easy to fix. I tried running neon-testgen.ml to verify, but it is apparently no longer valid ocaml, as it doesn't work with the ocamlc 4.01.0 I have on Ubuntu 14.04. I get a syntax error. Someone who kno

Re: RFA: PATCH to store_field for storing a CONSTRUCTOR into a base subobject

Hi Jason, On 08/10/15 03:42, Jason Merrill wrote: While looking at another issue I noticed that in g++.dg/init/vbase1.C the Diamond(int) constructor was unnecessarily storing a CONSTRUCTOR into a stack temporary and then copying it into the SubB base subobject rather than directly storing the

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 10/29/2015 03:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: Actually this is even worse than I thought because it sounds like you're saying you knowingly checked something in while being aware it would break another port. Only when -fno-plt was used. So, that's a target independent feature in GCC !

Go patch committed: Use Go function closures for type hash/equal functions

This patch changes the type descriptor hash and equal functions from C code pointers to Go func values. This permits them to be set to a Go function closure. This is in preparation for the Go 1.5, so that we can use a closure for the hash/equal functions returned by the new reflect.ArrayOf functi

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 10/28/2015 07:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 10/29/2015 02:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff Law wrote: So I'll ask again, why did you commit a patch which you clearly knew did not meet the conditions Bernd set f

Re: [Docs] Reword the documentation for -fdump-rtl-

On 10/29/2015 10:55 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote: diff --git a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi index 76fdc31..5549f17 100644 --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi @@ -6665,17 +6665,19 @@ Says to make debugging dumps during compilation at times specified by @var{letters}.

Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

On 10/28/2015 07:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: You didn't answer my question. I asked why you committed a patch given it didn't meet the conditions Bernd set forth for approval. I didn't ask anything about the bug itself. So I'll ask again, why did you commit a patch which you clearly knew did not me

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Save the PIC reg when needed

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > The PIC reg (r30) needs to be saved whenever the prologue sets it up, > not just if it is used elsewhere in the function. Without this patch > the prologue for such a function will modify r30 without saving it > first, leading to disas

Re: [PATCH] New attribute to create target clones

> Yes. This is not necessary. However that way we'll have the following > code in dispatcher: > cmpl$6, __cpu_model+4(%rip) > sete%al > movzbl %al, %eax > testl %eax, %eax > jle .L16 > movl$foo.target_clone.1, %eax > I think it is v

Re: [Docs] Reword the documentation for -fdump-rtl-

Hi Sandra, Thanks for the review. On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:22:01AM -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > s/will be registered/are registered/ Fixed, alongside other occurrences. > >+registered by plugins, which are specific to compilation targets, or > >+which are otherwise registered after all t

[PATCH] rs6000: Save the PIC reg when needed

The PIC reg (r30) needs to be saved whenever the prologue sets it up, not just if it is used elsewhere in the function. Without this patch the prologue for such a function will modify r30 without saving it first, leading to disaster back in its callers. This happened in the testsuite for -m32 lib

[PATCH] lra: Don't remove the scratch in (mem:BLK (scratch))

LRA wants to replace SCRATCH registers with real registers. It should not do that with (mem:BLK (scratch)), which is special, not really a scratch register. I don't know if this patch handles this in the best place to handle it; I don't even know if it is really correct. It does solve the rs6000

Re: [PING][PATCH][4.9]Backport "Fix register corruption bug in ree"

On October 29, 2015 4:37:08 PM GMT+01:00, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: >On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Renlin Li wrote: >> Ping ~ >> >> Can somebody review it? Thank you! >> >> Regards, >> Renlin Li >> >> >> On 16/04/15 10:32, Renlin Li wrote: >>> >>> Ping~ >>> >>> Regards, >>> Renlin Li >>> >>>

[PATCH 4/4] Add -Wmisleading-indentation to -Wall

Our documentation describes -Wall as enabling "all the warnings about constructions that some users consider questionable, and that are easy to avoid (or modify to prevent the warning), even in conjunction with macros." I believe that -Wmisleading-indentation meets these criteria, and is likely to

Re: Robustify REAL_MODE_FORMAT

Richard Biener writes: > On October 29, 2015 4:33:17 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt > wrote: >>On 10/29/2015 04:30 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >>> Make sure that REAL_MODE_FORMAT aborts if it is passed an invalid >>mode, >>> rather than stepping beyond the bounds of an array. It turned out >>that

[PATCH 2/4] Fix misleading indentation in tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c

tree-ssa-loop-unswitch.c has this bad indentation at line 452: 449if (dump_file && (dump_flags & TDF_DETAILS)) 450 fprintf (dump_file, ";; Not unswitching, loop is not expected" 451 " to iterate\n"); 452 return false; which leads to this war

[PATCH 0/4] -Wmisleading-indentation

The following patches: * tweak -Wmisleading-indentation to suppress a kind of false positive that occurred in three places in gcc's source tree, and * fix the two remaining truly misleadingly-indented places where the warning fires * adds -Wmisleading-indentation to -Wall Boot

[PATCH 3/4] Fix misleading indentation in tree-nested.c

tree-nested.c has this code: 2333 for (c = gimple_omp_taskreg_clauses (stmt); 2334 c; 2335 c = OMP_CLAUSE_CHAIN (c)) 2336if ((OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (c) == OMP_CLAUSE_FIRSTPRIVATE 2337 || OMP_CLAUSE_CODE (c) ==

[PATCH 1/4] -Wmisleading-indentation: don't warn in presence of entirely blank lines

Attempting to bootstrap gcc with -Wmisleading-indentation enabled I ran into a few failures where the indentation, although bad, was arguably not misleading. In regrename.c:scan_rtx_address: 1308 case PRE_MODIFY: 1309/* If the target doesn't claim to handle autoinc, this must be

Re: [PATCH 6/9] ENABLE_CHECKING refactoring: generators

On 10/18/2015 05:55 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: On 10/06/2015 03:56 PM, Richard Biener wrote: The generators should simply unconditionally check (not in generated files, of course). And the generated code parts should use flag_checking. Richard. genautomata has some macros similar to tree chec

  1   2   >