On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jul 19, 2016, at 5:46 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> The result of exercises with sed in gcc/ directory.
>>
>> 2016-07-19 Uros Bizjak
>>
>>* builtins.c: Use HOST_WIDE_INT_1 instead of (HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
>>HOST_WIDE_INT_1U instead of
Hi,
The patch fixes a couple of testsuite failures that show up for the
avr target because it has different sizes for longs and pointers (4
bytes versus 2), by explicitly disabling the warning for avr.
Does this make sense? Skipping the test by requiring ptr32plus would
have worked, but
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> When we instantiate an element of a pack expansion, we replace the argument
> pack in the template argument vec with an ARGUMENT_PACK_SELECT which
> indicates the desired element of the vec. If the args have been used to
> instantiate other t
Hi Richard,
As discussed in IPA-VRP discussion, this patch makes tree-vrp
allocations use alloc-pool and obstack for value_range and vr->equiv
respectively. Other allocations are rare and left as it is.
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86-64-linux with no new
regressions. Is this OK fo
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 06:35:11AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> > Or, if using GNU ar, you can even use -S, if that helps
On 07/19/16 19:30, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 07/19/16 18:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:20:55PM +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>> As discussed at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876,
>>> we have a _very_ old hack in gcc, that recognizes certain functions by
>>
On 13/07/16 18:26 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
This fixes a conflict between how Parallel Mode has always used the
_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS macro and the new meaning we gave it for GCC 6
(enabling the lightweight debug checks).
It doesn't make sense for Parallel Mode to own that macro, and it
might
Hi Mikael,
Then handle the GFC_DEP_ERROR here. Or initialize fin_dep with
GFC_DEP_NODEP at the beginning, as you prefer.
OK with either (and the unreachable assertions).
Here is the pacth the way I committed it.
Thanks for the review and the comments.
Regards
Thomas
2016-07-19 Tho
Hi Martin,
On 19/07/16 18:22, kugan wrote:
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the review. I have revised the patch based on the review.
Please see the comments below.
Maybe it is better to separate value range and alignment summary
writing/reading to different functions. Here is another updated versio
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Sutton
wrote:
> I did find another bug building cmcstl2, hence the attached
> disable-opt patch. For some reason, the memoization of concept
> satisfaction is giving momoized results for concept + args that have
> not yet been evaluated. This is exactly the
On 07/19/2016 08:26 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 07/19/2016 03:46 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
So I decided to also mention this alias.
Thoughts?
I'd like the new ipa-ra text to go in, but perhaps you should consider leaving
out option aliases out of this patch, especially given that it's non-t
On 07/19/2016 07:39 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/14/2016 10:12 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
This is a simple patch fixing ICE in tree-if-conv.c. Existing code does
not setup a variable (cond) when predicate of basic block is true and it
asserts on t
On 07/15/2016 02:33 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/14/2016 10:12 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
This is a simple patch fixing ICE in tree-if-conv.c. Existing code does
not setup a variable (cond) when predicate of basic block is true and it
asserts on t
On 07/19/2016 12:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing tree-vrp broken down a little -- it's quite
large and there's at least 4 distinct things going on in that
file.
1. ASSERT_EXPR handling.
2. Arithmetic on ranges
3. Propagation engine setup, callbacks, etc
4. Range management
On July 19, 2016 9:01:07 PM GMT+02:00, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>Hi folks.
>
>Ben brought this bug to my attention which was causing a failure in
>libabigail.
>
>The problem is that varargs functions are getting two
>DW_TAG_unspecified_parameters DIEs, because they are being emitted in
>early debu
On 07/19/2016 01:47 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/17/2016 09:52 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
+ if (is_vla)
+gcc_assert (warn_vla_limit > 0);
+ if (!is_vla)
+gcc_assert (warn_alloca_limit > 0);
if-else ? Or perhaps:
Shouldn't really matter, except perhaps in a -O0 compilation. Though I
On 07/19/2016 01:54 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 07/19/2016 05:03 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
(Same thing with alloca). There should be no warning for VLAs,
and for alloca, the warning should say "use of variable-length
array within a loop." The VRP dump suggests the range information
is available wit
Hi folks.
Ben brought this bug to my attention which was causing a failure in
libabigail.
The problem is that varargs functions are getting two
DW_TAG_unspecified_parameters DIEs, because they are being emitted in
early debug and again in late debug.
This problem appears in GCC 6 and in ma
Hello,
this is mostly good in general, but is lacking tests.
Especially, tests for successfull matching, and tests for every error
you are adding in the patch (except maybe the -fcoarray= one).
Also tests that the code executes successfullly with -fcoarray=single,
and that it produces the right
On July 19, 2016 7:27:30 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Normally empty blocks without successors (result of
>__builtin_unreachable ()
>somewhere in RTL) aren't considered as forwarder_block_p, because they
>don't satisfy single_succ_p. But e.g. during cross-jumping fake edges
>to
>exi
On Jul 19, 2016, at 5:46 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
> The result of exercises with sed in gcc/ directory.
>
> 2016-07-19 Uros Bizjak
>
>* builtins.c: Use HOST_WIDE_INT_1 instead of (HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
>HOST_WIDE_INT_1U instead of (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
>HOST_WIDE_INT_M1 instead
On July 19, 2016 6:19:23 PM GMT+02:00, Jeff Law wrote:
>On 07/14/2016 10:52 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:45 PM, kugan
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This patch adds a very simple early vrp implementation. This visits
>the
>>> basic blocks in the dominance order and
Tested on Linux-x64.
I'm quite sure there are cosmetic issues left in this patch, like in the section
references of the tests. I will send it out for review now anyway.
2016-07-19 Ville Voutilainen
Implement std::string_view and P0254r2,
Integrating std::string_view and std::string.
Hi,
I've recently committed a middle-end patch that adds handling of undefined
variables (that the nvptx backend needs) under -fno-toplevel-reorder (svn rev.
238371). With that change, it's no longer necessary to implicitly enable
-ftoplevel-reorder in the backend, and the following patch removes
On 19 July 2016 at 18:47, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/17/2016 09:52 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>
>> + if (is_vla)
>> +gcc_assert (warn_vla_limit > 0);
>> + if (!is_vla)
>> +gcc_assert (warn_alloca_limit > 0);
>>
>> if-else ? Or perhaps:
>
> Shouldn't really matter, except perhaps in a -
On 07/19/2016 05:03 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
(Same thing with alloca). There should be no warning for VLAs,
and for alloca, the warning should say "use of variable-length
array within a loop." The VRP dump suggests the range information
is available within the loop. Is the get_range_info() fu
On 07/17/2016 09:52 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
+ if (is_vla)
+gcc_assert (warn_vla_limit > 0);
+ if (!is_vla)
+gcc_assert (warn_alloca_limit > 0);
if-else ? Or perhaps:
Shouldn't really matter, except perhaps in a -O0 compilation. Though I
think else-if makes it slightly clearer.
On 07/19/16 18:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:20:55PM +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> As discussed at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876,
>> we have a _very_ old hack in gcc, that recognizes certain functions by
>> name, and inserts in some cases unsafe attrib
Hi!
Normally empty blocks without successors (result of __builtin_unreachable ()
somewhere in RTL) aren't considered as forwarder_block_p, because they
don't satisfy single_succ_p. But e.g. during cross-jumping fake edges to
exit are added and then they suddenly satisfy this predicate, which conf
On July 19, 2016 6:52:55 PM GMT+02:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>Hi!
>
>As mentioned in the PR and discussed on IRC, get_ref_base_and_extent
>can return size != maxsize or maxsize -1 and then we really can't trust
>the offset for the purposes we want. So this patch instead uses a
>different
>function
2016-07-19 13:31 GMT+03:00 Georg-Johann Lay :
> This patch tries to improve the bloated code we are currently generating for
> AVR_TINY. It's mostly about printing the memory loads and stores and more
> usage of reg_unused_after to print shorter instruction sequences in some
> cases.
>
> Ok for tr
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR and discussed on IRC, get_ref_base_and_extent
can return size != maxsize or maxsize -1 and then we really can't trust
the offset for the purposes we want. So this patch instead uses a different
function that just computes the base and offset if the offset is constant;
w
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:20:55PM +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> As discussed at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876,
> we have a _very_ old hack in gcc, that recognizes certain functions by
> name, and inserts in some cases unsafe attributes, that don't work for
> a freestanding en
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 02:46:46PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> The result of exercises with sed in gcc/ directory.
>>
>> 2016-07-19 Uros Bizjak
>>
>> * builtins.c: Use HOST_WIDE_INT_1 instead of (HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
>> HOST_WIDE_INT
Hi!
As discussed at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71876,
we have a _very_ old hack in gcc, that recognizes certain functions by
name, and inserts in some cases unsafe attributes, that don't work for
a freestanding environment.
It is unsafe to return ECF_MAY_BE_ALLOCA, ECF_LEAF and
On 07/14/2016 10:52 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:45 PM, kugan
wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds a very simple early vrp implementation. This visits the
basic blocks in the dominance order and set the Value Ranges (VR) for
SSA_NAMEs in the scope. Use this VR to discover more
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Scalar evolution needs to prove no-overflow for source variable when
>> handling type conversion. This is important because otherwise we would fail
>> to recognize result of the
On 07/11/2016 08:34 AM, marxin wrote:
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-07-12 Martin Liska
* selftest-run-tests.c (selftest::run_tests): New function.
* selftest.h (sreal_c_tests): Declare.
* sreal.c (sreal_verify_basics): New function.
(verify_aritmetics): Likewise.
On 07/19/2016 08:31 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
Thank you for the nits, sending second version of the patch.
M.
0002-Add-selftests-for-fibonacci_heap-v2.patch
From be12e60d4a2731cf4f1f68516e08f5bdb6c1ef77 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:17:24 +0200
Subject: [PATC
Hi Guys,
I am applying the patch below to fix a long standing snafu for the
m32r target where the files crtinit.o and crtfini.o were not being
built along with the rest of libgcc.
Tested with no regressions and a lot of test case fixes using an
m32r-elf toolchain.
Cheers
Nick
libgcc
On 07/19/2016 07:04 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
If a NULL is passed in as the expected or actual value for an
ASSERT_STREQ, the call to strcmp within selftest::assert_streq
can segfault, leading to a failure of -fself-test without
indicating which test failed.
Handle this more gracefully by checkin
On 19/07/16 16:30, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> This patchset improves zero extend costs and code generation.
>
> When zero extending a 32-bit register, we emit a "mov", but currently
> report the cost of the "mov" incorrectly.
>
> In terms of speed, we currently say the cost is that of an extend
> op
On Wed, 2016-07-13 at 13:38 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/06/2016 01:30 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > >
> > > This might be a bit confusing when more tests are added, since
> > > pointer equality is only useful in certain specific cases (e.g.
> > > when you know you're dealing with CONST_INTs or p
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 04:49:26PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >But you need the profile to make even reasonably good decisions.
>
> I'm not worried about making cost decisions: as far as I'm concerned
> it's perfectly fine for that. I'm worried about correctness - you can't
> validly save reg
On AArch64 the UXTB and UXTH instructions are aliases of UBFM,
which does a shift as part of its operation. An AND immediate is a
simpler operation, and might be faster on some implementations, so it is
better to emit this this instead of UBFM.
Benchmarking showed no difference on implementations
When zero extending a 32-bit value to 64 bits, there should always be a
SET operation on the outside, according to the patterns in aarch64.md.
However, the mid-end can also ask for the cost of a made-up instruction,
where the zero-extend is part of another operation, not SET.
In this case we curre
This patchset improves zero extend costs and code generation.
When zero extending a 32-bit register, we emit a "mov", but currently
report the cost of the "mov" incorrectly.
In terms of speed, we currently say the cost is that of an extend
operation. But the cost of a "mov" is the cost of 1 instr
Hi Yuri,
I saw this test case runs on arm platforms, and maybe other platforms as
well.
testsuite/g++.dg/vect/pr70729.cc:7:10: fatal error: xmmintrin.h: No such
file or directory
Before the change here, it's gated by vect_simd_clones target selector,
which limit it to i?86/x86_64 platform
On 07/19/2016 03:46 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>> So I decided to also mention this alias.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I'd like the new ipa-ra text to go in, but perhaps you should consider leaving
> out option aliases out of this patch, especially given that it's non-trivial,
> as
> Andreas' comment h
On 07/19/2016 04:46 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
But you need the profile to make even reasonably good decisions.
I'm not worried about making cost decisions: as far as I'm concerned
it's perfectly fine for that. I'm worried about correctness - you can't
validly save registers inside a loop
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 07:03:04PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> >>>+ /* The frequency of executing the prologue for this BB and all BBs
> >>>+ dominated by it. */
> >>>+ gcov_type cost;
> >>
> >>Is this frequency consideration the only thing that attempts to prevent
> >>placing prologue ins
Thank you for the nits, sending second version of the patch.
M.
>From be12e60d4a2731cf4f1f68516e08f5bdb6c1ef77 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:17:24 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Add selftests for fibonacci_heap
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-07-13 Martin Liska
* Makefile
[Version 4 is respun to apply without conflicts to current sources
and, as previously discussed, makes the PowerPC logic for selecting
machine modes match that used for *q constants.]
ISO/IEC TS 18661-3:2015 defines C bindings to IEEE interchange and
extended types, in the form of _FloatN and _Fl
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:40:03PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > > +/* { dg-do compile { target { powerpc*-*-linux* && ilp32 } } } */
> > > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -m32 -msvr4-struct-return" } */
> > I think you can drop the ilp32.
>
> You cannot use -m32 on a 64-bit little endian system, so t
> So I decided to also mention this alias.
>
> Thoughts?
I'd like the new ipa-ra text to go in, but perhaps you should consider leaving
out option aliases out of this patch, especially given that it's non-trivial, as
Andreas' comment has shown.
(I'd say it's rather confusing that -fprofile is qu
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 07/14/2016 10:12 AM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> This is a simple patch fixing ICE in tree-if-conv.c. Existing code does
>> not setup a variable (cond) when predicate of basic block is true and it
>> asserts on the variable. Interesting thi
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> Yes. The other option is to enable this checking not with ENABLE_CHECKING
> but some new checking option, say ENABLE_CHECKING_ALGORITHMS, and
> do full checking in that case.
Thanks - I'm going to fold in this idea when redoing the patch (i.e. check a
Hi,
The below patch conditionally defines Int32 and UInt32 to accomodate
targets with sizeof(int) != 4.
Regtested with x86_64 and avr. Committed as obvious.
Regards
Senthil
2016-07-19 Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
* gcc.dg/params/blocksort-part.c: Conditionally define Int32
Thanks Jakub for your comments.
I changed the test as you proposed.
Yuri.
2016-07-19 15:50 GMT+03:00 Jakub Jelinek :
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 03:40:47PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I was informed that the test pr70729.cc from g++.dg/vect is failed on
>> non-x86 targets.
>> I d
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 08:58:44AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> The attached patch provides some improved patterns for "and with
> complement" to the s390 machine description. Bootstrapped and
> regression tested on s390 and s390x.
Version 2 of the patch, reduced to the bare patterns. Regression
I made a copy&paste error when writing
selftest::verify_three_block_rtl_cfg, forgetting to update the
basic block ptr when asserting the value of "flags".
Fixed thusly.
Successfully bootstrapped®rtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Verified -fself-test of stage1 on powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.3.0.
Committed t
Martin Liška writes:
> Thank you very much for the suggestions, I've basically followed all nits you
> spotted. I also noticed that there is actually one more alias of -p and that's
> -profile. That comes from >20 years old commit:
-profile is not the same as -p, as the former also adds -lc_p.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 02:46:46PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> The result of exercises with sed in gcc/ directory.
>
> 2016-07-19 Uros Bizjak
>
> * builtins.c: Use HOST_WIDE_INT_1 instead of (HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
> HOST_WIDE_INT_1U instead of (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
> HOST_WIDE_IN
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 03:40:47PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I was informed that the test pr70729.cc from g++.dg/vect is failed on
> non-x86 targets.
> I did minor changes to delete target specific stuff like xmmintrin.h.
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
This is still wrong, aligned_all
The result of exercises with sed in gcc/ directory.
2016-07-19 Uros Bizjak
* builtins.c: Use HOST_WIDE_INT_1 instead of (HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
HOST_WIDE_INT_1U instead of (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) 1,
HOST_WIDE_INT_M1 instead of (HOST_WIDE_INT) -1 and
HOST_WIDE_INT_M1U instead of (un
On 07/13/2016 07:04 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
>> --- a/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
>> +++ b/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
>> @@ -7260,7 +7260,9 @@ any called function. In that case it is not necessary
>> to save and restore
>> them around calls. This is only possible if called functions are part of
>> same c
Hi All,
I was informed that the test pr70729.cc from g++.dg/vect is failed on
non-x86 targets.
I did minor changes to delete target specific stuff like xmmintrin.h.
Is it OK for trunk?
Changelog:
2016-07-19 Yuri Rumyantsev
PR tree-optimization/71734
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/
If a NULL is passed in as the expected or actual value for an
ASSERT_STREQ, the call to strcmp within selftest::assert_streq
can segfault, leading to a failure of -fself-test without
indicating which test failed.
Handle this more gracefully by checking for NULL, so that
information on the failing
On Tue, 2016-07-12 at 15:17 +0200, marxin wrote:
Thanks for writing selftests!
FWIW, some spelling nits below (I'm not a reviewer, and not familiar
with our fibonacci heap implementation).
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> 2016-07-13 Martin Liska
>
> * Makefile.in: Include fibonacci_heap.c
>
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Scalar evolution needs to prove no-overflow for source variable when handling
> type conversion. This is important because otherwise we would fail to
> recognize result of the conversion as SCEV, resulting in missing loop
> optimization
The attached patch XFAILs some of the "insv" testcases as
discussed internally. Tested on s390x biarch and s390.
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
* gcc.target/s390/insv-1.c: Xfail some tests.
* gcc.target/s390/insv-2.c: Likewise.
>From
Hi!
On 15 Jul 12:39, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2016-07-14 20:32 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law :
> > On 07/05/2016 09:44 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> This patch adds several tests to check tails vectorization functionality.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ilya
> >> --
> >> gcc/testsuite/
> >>
> >> 2016
The following patch fixes missing constant propagation in SSA propagators
and FRE. Noticed this when working on sth else.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
Richard.
2016-07-19 Richard Biener
* gimple-fold.c (get_base_constructor): Add VIEW_CONVERT case,
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 02:19:52PM +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> No GCC port supports a floating-point format suitable for _Float128x.
> Although there is HFmode support for ARM and AArch64, use of that for
> _Float16 is not enabled. Supporting _Float16 would require additional
> work on the exc
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:28 PM, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 6:28 PM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15,
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hello.
>
> As mentioned in PR71920, I would like to backport the change to GCC 4.9 and 5.
>
> May I install the patch after proper testing?
Yes, it's pretty obvious.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Martin
Hello.
As mentioned in PR71920, I would like to backport the change to GCC 4.9 and 5.
May I install the patch after proper testing?
Thanks,
Martin
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 07/19/2016 12:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> I think that start/end_recording_case_labels also merged adjacent labels
>> via group_case_labels_stmt. Not sure why you need to stop recording
>> case labels during the transform. Is this
Hi.
Suggested patch was just grabbed from the PR.
Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests.
Ready to be installed?
Martin
>From e6c55da822bc5a7464edc9cedb9b08f56e310885 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:47:27 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Do n
On 07/19/2016 12:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I think that start/end_recording_case_labels also merged adjacent labels
via group_case_labels_stmt. Not sure why you need to stop recording
case labels during the transform. Is this because you are building a new
switch stmt?
It's because the ca
On 07/19/2016 11:37 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> ;
> +; And with complement
> +;
> +; c = ~b & a = (b & a) ^ a
> +
> +(define_insn_and_split "*andc_split"
Please append here to make the insn name unique.
> + [(set (match_operand:GPR 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "")
> + (and:GPR (not:GPR (match_op
On 07/18/2016 11:14 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
How does this look?
I think it's 99% there. You've addressed all of my comments so
far -- thanks for that and for being so patient. I realize it
would be a lot more efficient to get all the feedback (or as much
of it as possible) up front. Unfortun
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 07/19/2016 12:22 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/19/2016 12:09 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
I saw walks over stmts of a BB. IMHO that's a no-go.
>>>
>>>
>>> Only to find the first
This patch tries to improve the bloated code we are currently generating for
AVR_TINY. It's mostly about printing the memory loads and stores and more
usage of reg_unused_after to print shorter instruction sequences in some cases.
Ok for trunk?
I also played around with PLUS in legitimate_add
On 07/19/2016 12:22 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 07/19/2016 12:09 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I saw walks over stmts of a BB. IMHO that's a no-go.
Only to find the first or last nondebug one. Is that unacceptable?
Does gsi_start_nondebug_after_labels_
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 07/19/2016 12:09 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I saw walks over stmts of a BB. IMHO that's a no-go.
Only to find the first or last nondebug one. Is that unacceptable?
Does gsi_start_nondebug_after_labels_bb not fit?
--
Marc Glisse
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-07-13 Martin Liska
* Makefile.in: Include fibonacci_heap.c
* fibonacci_heap.c: New file.
* fibonacci_heap.h (fibonacci_heap::insert): Use insert_node.
(fibonacci_heap::union_with): Fix deletion of the second heap.
* selftest-run-tests
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-07-12 Martin Liska
* selftest-run-tests.c (selftest::run_tests): New function.
* selftest.h (sreal_c_tests): Declare.
* sreal.c (sreal_verify_basics): New function.
(verify_aritmetics): Likewise.
(sreal_verify_arithmetics): Likewise.
Hello.
Following small patch set adds selftests for sreal and fibonacci_heap.
I basically transformed the existing tests (for sreal) which were implemented
as a GCC plugin.
Current implementation of the fibonacci heap corrupts memory in
union_with and another usability change was applied to inser
On 07/19/2016 12:09 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I saw walks over stmts of a BB. IMHO that's a no-go.
Only to find the first or last nondebug one. Is that unacceptable?
I'm thinking of
switch (a)
{
...
case n:
do-stuff;
default:
switch (a)
{
case n:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 07/19/2016 10:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>>
>> This is not appropriate for CFG cleanup due to its complexity not
>> being O(# bbs + # edges).
>> I tried hard in the past to make it so (at least when no transform is
>> done).
>
>
> Wh
> Le 18 juil. 2016 à 02:02, Jerry DeLisle a écrit :
>
> Please test this revised patch. See my comments in the PR.
>
> I think we should commit this one.
>
> Jerry
Jerry,
As said on IRC I think the limit should be documented and a TODO comment added
to gcc/fortran/gfortran.h.
While trying
On 07/19/2016 10:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
This is not appropriate for CFG cleanup due to its complexity not
being O(# bbs + # edges).
I tried hard in the past to make it so (at least when no transform is done).
Why wouldn't it be, if no transform is done? Assuming we visit each bb
once, w
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:28:48AM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
> Well, one thing to note is that the warning is an easy way to get a
> notice of a possible missed optimization (and I have many more
> occurrences of it in a particular code base that I use). If the
> warning is highlighted potent
On 18/07/16 12:49 -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
Perhaps the right answer is to drop support for catching nullptr as a
pointers to member from the language.
Yes, I've been drafting a ballot comment along those lines.
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the review. I have revised the patch based on the review.
Please see the comments below.
On 15/07/16 22:23, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
thanks for working on extending IPA-CP in this way. I do have a few
comments though:
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 02:46:50PM +1000, kugan w
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 06:35:11AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> > Or, if using GNU ar, you can even use -S, if that helps (after testing
>> > for it in configure, of course).
>>
>> I
On 18.07.2016 16:13, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 07/14/2016 05:11 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
The hook allows better diagnostics: The address spaces are registered
with c_register_addr_space and if the parser comes across an address
space it provides the hook with the needed information, in particu
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Ugh. What impact does this have on stage2 compile-time?
>
> It doesn't seem to be high enough to be measured reliably. I've made a trial
> run with -time=time.log in BOOT_CFLAGS, but there's
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> The motivating example for this patch was a change that was submitted for
> genattrtab last year, which would have made us generate
>
> switch (type = get_attr_type (insn))
> {
>... some cases ...
>default:
> switch (type = get
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
