This patch reflects to corresponding compiler changes. In particular, it
just enables -fsanitize-recover=address switch and migrates two small
testcases from upstream. I don't backport other stress tests because
they are heavy and have unstable output.
-Maxim
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-11-
Hi!
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 21:22:11 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/13/2015 09:06 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> > On 11/11/15 09:19, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >> On 11/11/2015 02:59 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >>> That's not the problem. How to conditionally enable the test is the
> >>> difficulty.
Hi!
Following recent discussion
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg02310.html), I would like
to merge recent sanitizer library to GCC to make available new useful
features from upstream in GCC 6:
* The shadow offset for ASan was unified on Aarch64 for 39 and 42 VMAs
(http://revi
Hi Jason!
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:30:34 -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> I'm planning to merge the C++ delayed folding branch this week [...]
Would be nice to get rid of the two following UNRESOLVEDs:
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init/self1.C
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/init/self1.C
> @@ -10,7 +10,
In GCC zlib is only used for libjava; for binutils and gdb it is used when
building without --with-system-zlib. This just updates zlib from 1.2.7 to 1.2.8
(released in 2013). Applies cleanly, libjava still builds and doesn't show any
regressions in the testsuite. Ok to apply (even if we alrea
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> Currently BB vectorization computes all dependences inside a BB
> region and fails all vectorization if it cannot handle some of them.
>
> This is obviously not needed - BB vectorization can restrict the
> dependence tests to those that are
On 11/22/2015 8:48 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 11:51:47PM -0700, Michael Collison wrote:
2015-11-06 Michael Collison
* config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md (widen_ssum, widen_usum)
(aarch64_w_internal): New patterns
* config/aarch64/iterators.md (Vhalf, VDBLW): Ne
> > > ../../gcc/ada/s-os_lib.adb:1007:16: note: return value type
> > > mismatch
> > >function strerror (errnum : Integer) return System.Address;
> > > ^
> > >
> > > ../../gcc/ada/s-os_lib.adb:1007:16: note:
> > > ???system__os_lib__errno_message__strerror??? was previously
> > + tree t = TREE_TYPE (field);
> > + if (in_lto_p)
> > + {
> > + /* VECTOR_TYPE and ARRAY_TYPE share the alias set with their
> > + element type and that type has to be normalized to void *,
> > + too, in the case it is a pointer. */
> > +
[ was: Re: [PATCH, 10/16] Add pass_oacc_kernels pass group in passes.def ]
On 20/11/15 11:37, Richard Biener wrote:
I'd rather make loop_optimizer_init do nothing
if requested flags are already set and no fixup is needed and
call the above unconditionally. Thus sth like
Index: gcc/loop-init.c
Hi,
In verify_loop_structure, we stop checking the latch once we find that
it's NULL.
This patch tries a bit harder:
- if !LOOPS_MAY_HAVE_MULTIPLE_LATCHES, we don't allow a NULL latch
- if LOOPS_MAY_HAVE_MULTIPLE_LATCHES, we check that indeed there's no
single loop latch.
As a consequence o
> + tree t = TREE_TYPE (field);
> + if (in_lto_p)
> + {
> + /* VECTOR_TYPE and ARRAY_TYPE share the alias set with their
> +element type and that type has to be normalized to void *,
> +too, in the case it is a pointer. */
> +
Hi,
here is updated patch which I finally comitted today. It addresses all the
comments
and also fixes one nasty bug that really cost me a lot of time to understand.
+ /* LTO type merging does not make any difference between
+component pointer types. We may have
+
+
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 02:35:01PM -0800, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> Another old patch I forgot about. This one is fairly self
> explanatory. We were not handling pending spaces for
> ADVANCE_NO and T editing.
>
> Regression tested x86-64-linux. New test case.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
Looks ok to me.
Another old patch I forgot about. This one is fairly self explanatory. We were
not handling pending spaces for ADVANCE_NO and T editing.
Regression tested x86-64-linux. New test case.
OK for trunk?
Jerry
2015-11-22 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/52251
* io/transfer.c (forma
On 11/22/2015 01:44 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 01:32:56PM -0800, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
>> This minor patch brings the leading zero to emitting floats with g0 editing
>> by
>> moving the block of code up a little before the g0 is handled. This has been
>> lurking in my trunk f
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 5:31 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This patch short-circuits the builtins.c expansion code for a particular
> gimple call if:
>
> - the function has an associated internal function
> - the target implements that internal function
> - the call has no side effects
>
> This al
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 01:32:56PM -0800, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> This minor patch brings the leading zero to emitting floats with g0 editing by
> moving the block of code up a little before the g0 is handled. This has been
> lurking in my trunk for several moths and I would like to get it out of t
This minor patch brings the leading zero to emitting floats with g0 editing by
moving the block of code up a little before the g0 is handled. This has been
lurking in my trunk for several moths and I would like to get it out of the way.
Updated Test case also.
Regression tested on x86-64-linux.
This fixes an oversight in the recent changes to the allocations log for
supporting sized delete.
Tested libitm on x86_64-linux. COmmitted as obvious.
libitm/
* libitm_i.h (gtm_alloc_action): Remove union.
* testsuite/libitm.c/alloc-1.c: New.
commit 74c5fd924fe3e8d6becec
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> The full round of testing from v1 turned up a couple of problems.
>
> One of which I believe I've worked around in the i386 backend, but I believe
> to be a latent problem within combine.
>
> With the following patch, disable the add3_*_
v2 of the patch. Seems to pass the GCC testsuite, although the
testsuite doesn't stress FP.
There is something wrong with current VSX SFmode constraints.
Index: rs6000.md
===
--- rs6000.md (revision 230723)
+++ rs6000.md (working co
Hi,
Patch committed to trunk as obvious. Thanks to Dominique and Steve.
Jim
On 11/22/2015 12:59 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:
I have no idea if this is actually correct, but it restores bootstrap.
OK to commit?
2015-11-22 Steven G. Kargl
* openmp.c (match_oacc_clause_gang): Fix boot
On 11/22/2015 10:59 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> I have no idea if this is actually correct, but it restores bootstrap.
> OK to commit?
>
This looks correct to me. There should be no more in the lists than
OMP_LIST_NUM. Was there a PR for this and do we know when it broke?
Jerry
On 11/22/2015 01:14 AM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
> Is it OK to back port revision r227760 to 5.3?
> Tested on x86_64-apple-darwin14
>
> Dominique
>
I think its OK.
Jerry
I have no idea if this is actually correct, but it restores bootstrap.
OK to commit?
2015-11-22 Steven G. Kargl
* openmp.c (match_oacc_clause_gang): Fix bootstrap.
Index: openmp.c
===
--- openmp.c(revision 230723)
++
Hi,
this patch fixes tree-ssa-dce ICE seen during Ada bootstrap. It is updated
version of https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg02876.html for
current mainline
Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, OK?
PR middle-end/65337
* tree-ssa-dce.c (bb_postorder): New static var.
> > this patch fixes an ICE seen with Ada LTO bootstrap in reporting type
> > mismatches and it also makes us to stop complaining about C++ ODR
> > violation. The warnings are however correct. I looked at few:
> >
> > ../../libiberty/xstrerror.c:40:14: warning: type of �strerror� does not
> > ma
> Le 22 nov. 2015 à 17:21, Steve Kargl a
> écrit :
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 09:51:09AM +0100, Dominique d'Humi??res wrote:
>>
>> Compiling the attached code after revision r230710 gives the ICE
>>
>> f951: internal compiler error: in gfc_simplify_cshift, at
>> fortran/simplify.c:1823
>>
Hi Richard,
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:38:31AM +0100, Richard Henderson wrote:
> One of which I believe I've worked around in the i386 backend, but I
> believe to be a latent problem within combine.
>
> With the following patch, disable the add3_*_overflow_2 patterns.
> Then compile c-c++-comm
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 09:51:09AM +0100, Dominique d'Humi??res wrote:
>
> Compiling the attached code after revision r230710 gives the ICE
>
> f951: internal compiler error: in gfc_simplify_cshift, at
> fortran/simplify.c:1823
>
> while it compiled before.
>
File a bug report, then fix rank
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 23:28 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > The source ranges are verified using the same unit-testing plugin used
> > for C expressions. This leads to a wart, which is that it means having
> > a .m test file lurking below gcc.dg/plugin
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 11:51:47PM -0700, Michael Collison wrote:
> 2015-11-06 Michael Collison
> * config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md (widen_ssum, widen_usum)
> (aarch64_w_internal): New patterns
> * config/aarch64/iterators.md (Vhalf, VDBLW): New mode attributes.
> * gcc.target/aarch64/
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:32:07AM +, Bilyan Borisov wrote:
> Implementing vmulx_* and vmulx_lane* NEON intrinsics
>
> Hi all,
>
> This series of patches focuses on the different vmulx_ and vmulx_lane NEON
> intrinsics variants. All of the existing inlined assembly block
> implementations
>
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:03:28AM +, Bilyan Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 03/11/15 11:16, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> >On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 09:31:08AM +, Bilyan Borisov wrote:
> >>In this patch from the series, all vmulx_lane variants have been
> >>implemented as
> >>a vdup followed by a vmu
> > ../../gcc/ada/s-os_lib.adb:1007:16: note: return value type
> > mismatch
> >function strerror (errnum : Integer) return System.Address;
> > ^
> >
> > ../../gcc/ada/s-os_lib.adb:1007:16: note:
> > ???system__os_lib__errno_message__strerror??? was previously
> > declared
> this patch fixes an ICE seen with Ada LTO bootstrap in reporting type
> mismatches and it also makes us to stop complaining about C++ ODR
> violation. The warnings are however correct. I looked at few:
>
> ../../libiberty/xstrerror.c:40:14: warning: type of �strerror� does not
> match original
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On November 22, 2015 2:52:53 AM GMT+01:00, David Edelsohn
> wrote:
>>PowerPC was missing a definition of the lroundMN pattern, which can be
>>implemented with VSX instructions available in Power7. Below is a
>>first draft.
> Why unsafe-
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 11:19:57AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> When implementing interrupt attribute for x86 interrupt handlers, we
> have a difficult time to access interrupt data passed down by x86
> processors. On x86, interrupt handlers are only called by processors
> which push interrupt data ont
On 20/11/2015 14:14, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> Status
>> ==
>>
>> We plan to do a GCC 5.3 release candidate at the end of next week
>> followed by the actual release a week after that.
>>
>> So now is the time to look at your regress
The full round of testing from v1 turned up a couple of problems.
One of which I believe I've worked around in the i386 backend, but I believe to
be a latent problem within combine.
With the following patch, disable the add3_*_overflow_2 patterns. Then
compile c-c++-common/torture/builtin-ar
Is it OK to back port revision r227760 to 5.3?
Tested on x86_64-apple-darwin14
Dominique
Index: gcc/ChangeLog
===
--- gcc/ChangeLog (revision 230703)
+++ gcc/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,17 @@
+2015-11-22 Dominiqu
Hi Steve,
Compiling the attached code after revision r230710 gives the ICE
f951: internal compiler error: in gfc_simplify_cshift, at
fortran/simplify.c:1823
while it compiled before.
TIA
Dominique
mhd.f90
Description: Binary data
43 matches
Mail list logo
