On 03/01/2016 01:01 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> gcc/ada/ChangeLog
>
> * system-linux-s390.adsx: Enable Stack_Check_Probes.
> * system-linux-s390.ads: Likewise.
Applied. Thanks!
-Andreas-
On 01/11/2016 03:40 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> * gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90: Reduce accuracy for S/390.
Applied. Thanks!
-Andreas-
Hi Richard,
I think we could incorporate your feedback by changing the predicate on
operand 1 to "arm_rhs_operand" which allows "s_register_operand" or
"arm_immediate_operand". Everything else in my patch would stay the same
including splitting the thumb2 pattern out into it's own insn. I'm
t
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:38:13PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/01/2016 07:10 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >This PR from 2011 reports that -Waddress prints unhelpful warning when the
> >comparison comes from a macro. Since I've added from_macro_expansion_at,
> >this is easy to circumvent. I'm not
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 07:30:12AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 08:43:21PM -0500, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> > The following patch should fix PR
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70025
> >
> > The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 07:36:23AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > Another patch reducing the accuracy required in the bessel_6 test.
>
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> >
> > * gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90: Reduce accuracy for S/390.
Ok, thanks.
>
> > >From 70a35dd6f6bf906d8e5907667ad0f04f981a61ac
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:18:48PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> The attached patch adds the a target specific attribute via the
> new target macro TARGET_BEGIN_TRANSACTION_ATTRIBUTE to the
> function begin_transaction(). S/390 uses this to set the
> soft-float target attribute which is needed to f
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:40:56PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> Another patch reducing the accuracy required in the bessel_6 test.
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>
> * gfortran.dg/bessel_6.f90: Reduce accuracy for S/390.
> >From 70a35dd6f6bf906d8e5907667ad0f04f981a61ac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 12:33:21PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 05:53:08PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > On 12/31/2015 04:50 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >The attached patch fixes C++-11 handling of "alignas(0)" which
> > >should be ignored but currently generates an error m
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 08:43:21PM -0500, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch should fix PR
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70025
>
> The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86/x86-64.
>
> Committed as rev. 233876.
Thanks.
> I'll work on the test
> Looks good to me. Obviously you'll need appropriate ChangeLogs. OK
> with the ChangeLogs added.
Done.
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:51 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
>> The wording of our output from -Wmisleading-indentation is rather
>> confusing, as noted by Reddit user "sysop073" here:
>>
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/47pejg/gcc_
Straightforward change.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit c11146bdabc5961956adfe00bef8e60657c60fa6
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Tue Mar 1 20:52:24 2016 -0500
PR c++/70036
* parser.c (cp_parser_requires_clause): Call
check_for_bare_parameter_packs.
diff
On 12/19/2011 12:56 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
DR 1313 removes the blanket prohibition on pointer subtraction in
constant expressions and replaces it with a prohibition on operations
with undefined behavior, so this testcase ought to work. It wasn't
working because our internal representation of p
On 02/29/2016 09:25 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
The bug here was that we were sharing the CONSTRUCTOR between the value
of 'a' and the elements of 'result', so changing 'a' also changed the
value of result[0]. Oops.
And there were a few other places with the same problem.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-
The following patch should fix PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70025
The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 233876.
I'll work on the test tomorrow -- I have no access to s390x right now.
Index: ChangeLog
===
On 03/01/2016 10:08 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 02/22/2016 02:22 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
My only question is why didn't you use FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_VRA from
rtl-iter.h
to walk the RTX expressions in coll
Hello,
As time progresses, the ada-hurd.diff patch has now been living in Debian since
gcc-4.6 and is now in gcc-5 and gcc-6. Last try to get it included upstream was
in 2012, and 2014, e.g see
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg0.html
and follow-ups.
Maybe the time has come now fo
On 03/01/2016 09:48 AM, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
Hi Richard,
As discussed in PR, tried to adjust the test case by initializing array, but
looks like for building with -fpic it needs visibility to be set a hidden.
The below patch does that.
Ok for trunk ?
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/Change
On 03/01/2016 07:10 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
This PR from 2011 reports that -Waddress prints unhelpful warning when the
comparison comes from a macro. Since I've added from_macro_expansion_at,
this is easy to circumvent. I'm not so sure we actually want to disable
the warning in the case of a m
Hello!
> 2016-03-01 Eric Botcazou
>
> PR rtl-optimization/70007
> * gcse.c (compute_ld_motion_mems): Tidy up and also invalidate memory
> references present in REG_EQUAL notes attached to non-SET patterns.
>
>
> 2016-03-01 Eric Botcazou
>
> * gcc.target/i386/pr70007.c: New test.
The testcas
On 02/25/2016 08:05 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Recently I had the opportunity to learn about a number of rather
subtle style conventions sometimes enforced during code reviews
(though not inconsistently followed in GCC code). To help find
these kinds of problems before a patch is submitted and cut
> How about saying "It specifies the storage order..."?
>
> And "in structures and unions"?
OK.
> How about "...is passed to a subprogram in slot #15..."?
OK.
> Okay with the changes above.
Thanks!
--
Eric Botcazou
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> - new scalar_storage_order type attribute in C,
> - ABI change for SPARC 64-bit,
> - automatic enabling of -mstackrealign with SSE for Windows 32-bit.
+ A new type attribute scalar_storage_order applying to
+ structures and unions has been int
On 03/01/2016 12:45 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Write a patch to deprecate it in config.gcc (search for openbsd2 to help
you find the right spot) and an update to the gcc6 webpage.
How's this?
Looks good to me. Obviously you'll need appropriate ChangeLogs. OK
with the ChangeLogs added.
jeff
On 03/01/2016 12:42 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 11:29:25AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
On 03/01/2016 11:26 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Can we make that official? 64402, 49401 & 24998 go away when MEP is
deprecated.
We can, what's the next step? I announced intent in Dec, nobody
On 03/01/2016 12:41 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html is now multiple screens of text.
The attached patch adds "id" attributes to every h2, h3 and h4 element
in the page, so that people can create URLs that reference specific
subsections of the guide.
Validates.
OK to commi
This patch clamps the number of statements to copy when not threading
across a loop backedge in the FSM/backwards threader. This fixes the
bulk of the regression in 69196. I'm still evaluating whether or not
69196 can be closed, but at the least it's a P2 now.
Bootstrapped and regression t
Hi David,
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, David Malcolm wrote:
> The attached patch adds "id" attributes to every h2, h3 and h4 element
> in the page, so that people can create URLs that reference specific
> subsections of the guide.
this is a great idea!
Allow me to suggest some potential tweaks wrt to the
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 10:39 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> Here is the updated patch with new testcases. OK for trunk?
>
>
> This is not a complete patch.
>
> Please update type_is_empty_record_p to use the definition from the recent
> discussion:
Here a
It's a regression present on all active branches caused by the RTL enhanced
load motion optimization (-fgcse-lm), which performs PRE on "simple" MEMs and
discards all other memory references. The problem is that it fails to discard
a particular memory reference present in a REG_EQUAL note:
(in
On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 20:45 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:11:11AM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > > Where are these canonicalization rules described?
> >
> > swap_commutative_operands_p?
>
> That function never swaps reg+reg, or I don't see it.
commutative_ope
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:47:46PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> well, exactly what I wrote in the original email and what you have
> quoted (and me as well) above. But let me quote the dejagnu source
> comment of dg-runtest, which is perhaps more clear:
>
> # FLAGS is a set of options to alway
Hi
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 07:47:49PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 07:39:18PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > as Jakub requested, this patch deals with HSA "excess errors" in the
> > libgomp library testsuite by passing -Wno-hsa to all of them. IIUC,
> > that passing it i
Another step along the path to fixing 69196. As I was investigating the
regression, one of the things that became quite clear was that we'd
greatly increased the number of PHIs and many of the PHI arguments were
constants (which in turn never coalesce and thus generate a constant
initializa
I noticed that several of the power9 tests do not check if the power9 support
was built into the compiler. This patch fixes this. I'm going to apply these
patches as being obvious.
2016-03-01 Michael Meissner
PR target/70033
* gcc.target/powerpc/p9-lxvx-stxvx-1.c: Make sure c
Please see the original thread
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-03/msg2.html.
I have to send the patches separately, as together they cause me to be
blocked for spamming. This is the big one, patch 4. It is compressed
with gzip since it is 150KB uncompressed.
---
Fritz Reese
0004-2016-0
On 03/01/2016 02:20 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
On Mar 1, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
This patch improves sanitizer testsuite to avoid sporadic failures, especially
when [cross-]testing on a remote machine.
There are several unstable sanitizer tests in GCC testsuite (e.g.,
g++.dg/
Please see the original thread
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-03/msg2.html.
I have to send the patches separately, as together they cause me to be
blocked for spamming. This is patch 3:
---
Fritz Reese
From 93e96b8a9e62c0413e6d9d33c01fa7825ecd9ee4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fritz O.
Please see the original thread
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-03/msg2.html.
I have to send the patches separately, as together they cause me to be
blocked for spamming. This is patch 2:
---
Fritz Reese
From 2f7077c45fdcf2d05554d9d2e22fc5261bd95661 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fritz O.
Please see the original message:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-03/msg2.html
I have to send the patches separately, as together they are blocked by
the spam filter. This is part 1:
---
Fritz Reese
From 00eaf54e4cc4bb63bfbcb1ffab97cb9b593f2c6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fritz O. Ree
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:51 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> The wording of our output from -Wmisleading-indentation is rather
> confusing, as noted by Reddit user "sysop073" here:
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/47pejg/gcc_6_wmisleadingindentation_vs_goto_fail/d0eonwd
>
>> The way t
On Feb 26, 2016, at 8:00 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> we would like a place to have some HSA-specific tests
Sounds reasonable.
> I have very little experience with tcl, expect or DejaGNU and would
> appreciate very much any feedback or guidance of anyone more
> experience in these areas. In parti
Just add -masm=intel asm dialect alternative.
2016-03-01 Uros Bizjak
PR target/70027
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_output_call_insn): Add -masm=intel
asm dialect alternatives to explicit GOTPCREL calls.
testsuite/ChangeLog:
2016-03-01 Uros Bizjak
PR target/70027
* gcc.ta
When stack checking is entirely done by the middle-end (default if no specific
back-end support or forced by -fstack-check=generic), the checking for the
prologue is actually done in the caller with a default range and the hope is
that the callee's static frame is not too large... There are a f
This is similar to Mark Gilsse's patch in the OP, except that it ensures that
the expression will fold back to a single condition. I did include Richi's
patch from #c6 to make it more likely to trigger asap.
I'd appreciate feedback on the match.pd changes; it's my first time looking
into this new
> Write a patch to deprecate it in config.gcc (search for openbsd2 to help
> you find the right spot) and an update to the gcc6 webpage.
How's this?
Index: htdocs/gcc-6/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-6/chang
htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html is now multiple screens of text.
The attached patch adds "id" attributes to every h2, h3 and h4 element
in the page, so that people can create URLs that reference specific
subsections of the guide.
Validates.
OK to commit?Index: htdocs/gcc-6/porting_to.html
=
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 11:29:25AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 03/01/2016 11:26 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> >>Can we make that official? 64402, 49401 & 24998 go away when MEP is
> >>deprecated.
> >
> >We can, what's the next step? I announced intent in Dec, nobody
> >commented or stepped up to take
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 08:08:03PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 09:31:26AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 02/24/2016 09:31 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > >The following is another issue with macros from system headers. In this
> > >case
> > >bool is defined in a system heade
On March 1, 2016 7:51:01 PM GMT+01:00, David Malcolm
wrote:
>The wording of our output from -Wmisleading-indentation is rather
>confusing, as noted by Reddit user "sysop073" here:
>https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/47pejg/gcc_6_wmisleadingindentation_vs_goto_fail/d0eonwd
>
>> The way
On 03/01/16 13:02, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
Evandro Menezes wrote:
The meaning of these attributes are not clear to me. Is there a
reference somewhere about which insns are FP or SIMD or neither?
The meaning should be clear, "fp" is a floating point instruction, "simd" a
SIMD one
as defined in A
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 09:31:26AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 02/24/2016 09:31 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >The following is another issue with macros from system headers. In this case
> >bool is defined in a system header to expand to _Bool and the "is promoted
> >to"
> >warning didn't trigger b
On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> What is the difference betwee the $flags and $default-extra-cflags
> arguments to dg-runtest? You seem to stick -Wno-hsa into the former,
> which to me looks like it will be mentioned as part of the test
> names (e.g. when cycling through -O* op
On Mar 1, 2016, at 10:40 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> as Jakub requested in another thread, this patch deals with HSA
> "excess errors" in the gomp compiler testsuite by passing -Wno-hsa to
> all of them.
> OK for trunk?
Ok.
Evandro Menezes wrote:
>
> The meaning of these attributes are not clear to me. Is there a
> reference somewhere about which insns are FP or SIMD or neither?
The meaning should be clear, "fp" is a floating point instruction, "simd" a
SIMD one
as defined in ARM-ARM.
> Indeed, I had to add the Y
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 07:39:18PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> as Jakub requested, this patch deals with HSA "excess errors" in the
> libgomp library testsuite by passing -Wno-hsa to all of them. IIUC,
> that passing it in the second parameter of dg-runtest (as opposed to
> the third) means that
Hi,
as Jakub requested in another thread, this patch deals with HSA
"excess errors" in the gomp compiler testsuite by passing -Wno-hsa to
all of them. IIUC, that passing it in the second parameter of
*-dg-runtest (as opposed to the third) means that it will apply even
tests that have their own dg
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 05:07:56PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 04:59:57PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > just like with the compiler gomp testsuite, we need to add -Wno-hsa to
> > options when compiling libgomp testcases in order not to have "excess
> > errors" failu
On 03/01/2016 11:26 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Can we make that official? 64402, 49401 & 24998 go away when MEP is
deprecated.
We can, what's the next step? I announced intent in Dec, nobody
commented or stepped up to take it.
Write a patch to deprecate it in config.gcc (search for openbsd2 to he
The wording of our output from -Wmisleading-indentation is rather
confusing, as noted by Reddit user "sysop073" here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/47pejg/gcc_6_wmisleadingindentation_vs_goto_fail/d0eonwd
> The way they split up the warning looks designed to trick you.
> sslKeyEx
> Can we make that official? 64402, 49401 & 24998 go away when MEP is
> deprecated.
We can, what's the next step? I announced intent in Dec, nobody
commented or stepped up to take it.
On 03/01/2016 11:05 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Note, though, that I'm in the process of deprecating mep...
Can we make that official? 64402, 49401 & 24998 go away when MEP is
deprecated.
jeff
Note, though, that I'm in the process of deprecating mep...
Ok.
On Mar 1, 2016, at 6:20 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> When switching from gdb 7.10 to the newly released gdb 7.11 on Solaris,
> all simulate-thread tests started to timeout
Ok. If a domain expert prefers a different strategy, I’m fine with anything
better as well.
On 01/03/16 17:33, Michael Collison wrote:
> This patches addresses PR 70014, where the predicates and operand do not
> match and could cause problems with the register allocator. Tested
> successfully on
>
> arm-none-linux-gnueabi
> arm-none-linux-gnuabihf
> armeb-none-linux-gnuabihf
> arm-none-e
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 06:24:58PM +0100, Tom de Vries wrote:
> --- a/gcc/omp-low.c
> +++ b/gcc/omp-low.c
> @@ -3715,6 +3715,14 @@ check_omp_nesting_restrictions (gimple *stmt,
> omp_context *ctx)
> kind == OMP_CLAUSE_DEPEND_SOURCE ? "source" : "sink");
> return false
> This new test fails for me with -m32.
Thanks for the heads up, fixed thusly, applied.
2016-03-01 Eric Botcazou
* gnat.dg/stack_usage3.adb: Robustify and enable for all targets.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: gnat.dg/stack_usage3.adb
==
This patches addresses PR 70014, where the predicates and operand do not
match and could cause problems with the register allocator. Tested
successfully on
arm-none-linux-gnueabi
arm-none-linux-gnuabihf
armeb-none-linux-gnuabihf
arm-none-eabi
Okay for trunk?
2016-03-01 Michael Collison
Hi,
this patch fixes an ICE in an openacc testcase. The patch fixes it by emitting
an 'unsupported' error.
We've been carrying this patch for a while in the gomp-4_0-branch (
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg01545.html ).
Build for C-only on top of trunk, ran goacc.exp regressi
Hi DJ,
Currently the MEP target does not define __INTPTR_TYPE__ or
__INT32_TYPE__ which is a problem for newlib. (The newlib header file
_intsup.h depends upon these macros being defined). Fortunately the
fix is easy - add newlib-stdin.h to the tm_file list for MEP.
So, is this patch
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 6:39 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 02/22/2016 02:22 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>
My only question is why didn't you use FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_VRA from
rtl-iter.h
to walk the RTX expressions in collect_address_parts and
>>
Hi Marek,
Thank you for pointing out. Yes I should add.
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
index 82e538e..f6bcb07 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2016-03-01 Venkataramanan Kumar
+
+ PR tree-optimization/686
On 1 March 2016 at 10:51, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:21:27AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 09:32:53AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > >
>> > > The following fixes PR69951, hopefully the last
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:48:40PM +, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
> /* { dg-do compile } */
> -/* { dg-options "-Ofast -fdump-tree-ifcvt-details -fno-common
> -ftree-loop-if-convert-stores" } */
> +/* { dg-options "-Ofast -fdump-tree-ifcvt-details
> -ftree-loop-if-convert-stores" } */
>
>
Hi Guys,
I am applying the patch below as an obvious fix for a problem with the
CR16 target - the lack of a definition of __INTPTR_TYPE__. This
definition is needed by the newlib C library's _intsup.h header in
order to correctly calculate the size of integers and pointers.
Cheers
Nick
Hi Richard,
As discussed in PR, tried to adjust the test case by initializing array, but
looks like for building with -fpic it needs visibility to be set a hidden.
The below patch does that.
Ok for trunk ?
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
index 82e538e..f6bcb07 10
The following fixes a checking issue when verifying BIT_FIELD_REF
sizes of non-integral non-BLKmode types. We should be using
MODE_SIZE, not MODE_PRECISION here as seen with the testcase.
Bootstrap / regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
typedef long double a __attribute__((vector_size (
On 02/24/2016 09:31 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
The following is another issue with macros from system headers. In this case
bool is defined in a system header to expand to _Bool and the "is promoted to"
warning didn't trigger because of that. The fix is to use the expanded
location.
Bootstrappe
Two additional regression tests for problems exposed by the 69740
patches. They tickle a different path than the test HJ already checked
in. Obviously the idea is to have these in place so that when we attack
69740 again, we don't regress these issues.
Installed on the trunk after verifying
On 01/03/16 10:49, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 01/03/16 09:54, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>>>
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:21:27AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, James G
Hi all,
For GCC 6 we want to deprecate architecture revisions prior to ARMv4T.
This patch implements this by documenting the deprecation in invoke.texi and
adding
a warning whenever the user specifies an -march or -mcpu option that selects
such
an architecture revision.
Bootstrapped and tested
Hi Richard,
On 01/03/16 09:16, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Renlin Li wrote:
Hi all,
The gcc.dg/lto/pr54709, pr61526, pr64415 linking testcases keep failing on
arm/aarch64 bare-metal target.
It's because statically built newlib library is used to link with shared
ob
On 03/01/2016 06:38 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
A trivial patch to fix an ICE on invalid: DECL_BUILT_IN only expects
a FUNCTION_DECL, so checking DECL_P is not enough.
You're right, that was caused by my r227458. I vaguely remember
wondering about that when I saw the stack trace but I must have
g
On 1 March 2016 at 16:19, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 01/03/16 09:54, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Tue, 1 Mar 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:21:27AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, 29 Feb 20
On 29-02-16 10:17, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Another long-standing regression present in the compiler (dating back to the
Tree-SSA merge): the compiler generates code that has an unexpectedly large
stack usage for nested calls on strings, because the gimplifier creates
temporaries in the outermost sco
On 03/01/2016 04:11 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> I wrote:
>> Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>>
>>> +; vec_set is supposed to *modify* an existing vector so operand 0 is
>>> +; duplicated as input operand.
>>> +(define_expand "vec_set"
>>> + [(set (match_operand:V0 "register_operand"
I wrote:
> Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>
> > +; vec_set is supposed to *modify* an existing vector so operand 0 is
> > +; duplicated as input operand.
> > +(define_expand "vec_set"
> > + [(set (match_operand:V0 "register_operand"
> >"")
> > + (unspec:V [(match_oper
On 03/01/2016 02:38 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 01:35:18PM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>> On 03/01/2016 01:15 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:29:28AM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
On 02/29/2016 02:36 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 02/29
Hi all,
This test was reported as starting to fail a scan-assembler check with
-mtune=thunderx.
The compiler decided to move the result back into the integer registers and
perform the shift there
rather than do it on the SIMD side.
However, the C code is undefined because the shift is wider tha
When switching from gdb 7.10 to the newly released gdb 7.11 on Solaris,
all simulate-thread tests started to timeout, adding about 2 1/2 hours
to bootstrap time. It turned out that this happens as follows: with gdb
7.10, a test is run like this and runs to completion without interaction:
/vol/gcc
OK.
Jason
This PR from 2011 reports that -Waddress prints unhelpful warning when the
comparison comes from a macro. Since I've added from_macro_expansion_at,
this is easy to circumvent. I'm not so sure we actually want to disable
the warning in the case of a macro, but probably yes.
Bootstrapped/regtested
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 01:35:18PM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> On 03/01/2016 01:15 PM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:29:28AM +0100, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> >> On 02/29/2016 02:36 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >>> On 02/29/2016 09:46 AM, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> Ok fo
A trivial patch to fix an ICE on invalid: DECL_BUILT_IN only expects
a FUNCTION_DECL, so checking DECL_P is not enough.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2016-03-01 Marek Polacek
PR c++/69795
* c-common.c (reject_gcc_builtin): Check for FUNCTION_DECL rather
I am testing the following patch to fix PR69983 - SCEV was confused
by a PRE inserted PHI node where it checks for equality of the
evolution of all edges. After my SCEV fix these have conversions
which are not handled by eq_evolutions_p.
I've noticed the function misses any type compatibility ch
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2016-03-01 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/70022
* fold-const.c (fold_indirect_ref_1): Fix range checking for
vector BIT_FIELD_REF extract.
* gcc.dg/pr70022.c: New testcase.
Index: gcc/fold-
> On Mar 1, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
>
> This patch improves sanitizer testsuite to avoid sporadic failures,
> especially when [cross-]testing on a remote machine.
>
> There are several unstable sanitizer tests in GCC testsuite (e.g.,
> g++.dg/tsan/aligned_vs_unaligned_race.C),
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Michael Haubenwallner
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 02/10/2016 10:52 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>
>>> There are two remaining issues:
>>>
>>> 1) FDEs with overlapping ranges causing problems with exceptions. I'm
>>> not sure of the best way to work around this.
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
