On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The
>if (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN)
> -shift_bytes_in_array (tmpbuf, byte_size, shift_amnt);
> +{
> + shift_bytes_in_array (tmpbuf, byte_size, shift_amnt);
> + if (shift_amnt == 0)
> + byte_size--;
> +}
> hunk below is th
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 04:02:40PM -0800, Marek Polacek wrote:
> What seems like a typo caused an ICE here. We've got a vector of vectors here
> and we're trying to walk all the elements, so the second loop oughta use 'j'.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> 2016-11-21
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Thanks!
--
Regards,
Tim Shen
commit 69c72d9bb802fd5e4f2704f0fe8a041f8b26d8bd
Author: Tim Shen
Date: Mon Nov 21 21:29:13 2016 -0800
2016-11-22 Tim Shen
PR libstdc++/78441
* include/std/variant: Propagate cv qualifications to types returned
> It's not obvious to me whether this belongs in -Wextra. After all, this
> is a perfectly reasonable and useful GNU C feature, or at least some cases
> of it are (like "#define FOO (BAR || defined something)"). Is the
> argument that there are too many details of it that differ between
> impleme
Ping!
On Monday 14 November 2016 07:03 PM, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote:
Ping!
On Thursday 10 November 2016 01:53 PM, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote:
On Wednesday 09 November 2016 08:05 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
On 09.11.2016 10:14, Pitchumani Sivanupandi wrote:
On Tuesday 08 November 2016 0
It's not obvious to me whether this belongs in -Wextra. After all, this
is a perfectly reasonable and useful GNU C feature, or at least some cases
of it are (like "#define FOO (BAR || defined something)"). Is the
argument that there are too many details of it that differ between
implementatio
Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00896.html
On 11/16/2016 08:58 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I'm still looking for a review of the patch below, first posted
on 10/28 and last updated/pinged last Wednesday:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00896.html
Thanks
On 11/0
What seems like a typo caused an ICE here. We've got a vector of vectors here
and we're trying to walk all the elements, so the second loop oughta use 'j'.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2016-11-21 Marek Polacek
PR tree-optimization/78455
* tree-ssa-uni
Ping. Still looking for a review of the patch below:
On 11/16/2016 10:33 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
I'm looking for a review of the patch below:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00779.html
Thanks
On 11/08/2016 05:09 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The -Wformat-length checker relies on t
Richard,
Attached is a lightly updated patch mostly with just clarifying
comments and a small bug fix. I'd appreciate your input (please
see my reply and questions below). I'm hoping to finalize this
patch based on your feedback so it can be committed soon.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 02:42:53PM -0800, Carl E. Love wrote:
> The Power ABI document lists a number of built-ins that it is supposed
> to support. There are still some missing. This patch adds the built-in
> support for the following built-ins:
[ snip ]
So, which are still missing after this?
On 11/21/2016 03:33 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Jeff Law wrote:
The CRIS port seems to have made a minor goof in a conditional guarding a call
to copy_to_mode_reg.
copy_to_mode_reg always allocates a new pseudo, so calling it when
!can_create_pseudo_p is going to result
On 21.11.2016 18:16, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
>> ahh, didn't see that :-/ Now fixed, is this clearer now?
>>
>> The options @option{--with-target-bdw-gc-include} and
>> @option{--with-target-bdw-gc-lib} must always specified together for
>
Segher:
I realized over the weekend that I forgot to update the built-in documentation
file, doc/extend.texi. I have updated the patch with these additions and fixed
the issues you mentioned before.
The Power ABI document lists a number of built-ins that it is supposed
to support. There are sti
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> The CRIS port seems to have made a minor goof in a conditional guarding a call
> to copy_to_mode_reg.
>
> copy_to_mode_reg always allocates a new pseudo, so calling it when
> !can_create_pseudo_p is going to result in an ICE.
>
> The attached patch fixes th
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:51:38PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> Okay, if you change the changelog to say what the patch actually does ;-)
> And please watch for fallout.
This is the ChangeLog entry I checked in.
2016-11-21 Michael Meissner
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md (movdi_in
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> We didn't have patterns yet for rl[wd]imi insns that do a rotate by 0.
> This fixes it. Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}. With a further
> patch (to generic code) now all my rl*imi tests works (I still need to
> make those tests u
I haven't seen any followups to this discussion of Bin's patch to
PR68303 and PR69710, the patch submission:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-05/msg02000.html
Discussion:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg00761.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01551.html
http://gc
> -Original Message-
> From: Toma Tabacu [mailto:toma.tab...@imgtec.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 8:53 AM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Matthew Fortune ; Moore,
> Catherine
> Subject: [PATCH, testsuite] MIPS: Add isa>=2 option to
> interrupt_handler-bug-1.c.
>
> Hi,
>
>
We didn't have patterns yet for rl[wd]imi insns that do a rotate by 0.
This fixes it. Tested on powerpc64-linux {-m32,-m64}. With a further
patch (to generic code) now all my rl*imi tests works (I still need to
make those tests usable in the GCC testsuite, they currently take
hours to run).
Is t
On 18 November 2016 at 16:50, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 11/18/16 12:58, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> On 17 November 2016 at 10:23, Kyrill Tkachov
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/11/16 12:58, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
Hi!
This patch enables the ldrd/strd peephole rules unconditionally.
The CRIS port seems to have made a minor goof in a conditional guarding
a call to copy_to_mode_reg.
copy_to_mode_reg always allocates a new pseudo, so calling it when
!can_create_pseudo_p is going to result in an ICE.
The attached patch fixes the ICE. But I don't know enough about the
CRI
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 09:14:57PM -0600, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> 2016-11-16 Bill Schmidt
> Richard Biener
>
> PR tree-optimization/77848
> * tree-if-conv.c (tree_if_conversion): Always version loops unless
> the user specified -ftree-loop-if-convert.
This broke t
Hi!
If some argument is nameless, then it can be only vector kind, because
it is impossible to use clauses on such argument. It doesn't make much
sense to use that (it is inefficient), but we shouldn't ICE on it.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, committed to trunk
so far.
Hi!
The
if (!BYTES_BIG_ENDIAN)
-shift_bytes_in_array (tmpbuf, byte_size, shift_amnt);
+{
+ shift_bytes_in_array (tmpbuf, byte_size, shift_amnt);
+ if (shift_amnt == 0)
+ byte_size--;
+}
hunk below is the actual fix for the PR, where we originally store:
8-bit 0 at of
Hi!
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:10:58PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if transforming the const-int to wide int makes this all easier to
> read?
Here is updated patch that does that.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2016-11-21 Jakub Jelinek
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 11:11:18AM +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> 2016-11-19 Bernd Edlinger
>
> PR c++/71973
> * doc/invoke.texi (-Wno-builtin-declaration-mismatch): Document the
> new default-enabled warning..
> * builtin-types.def (BT_CONST_TM_PTR): New primitive type.
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 01:27:59PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:07:21PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:52:12PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:43:40PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > > Could you a
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 08:40:37PM +0300, Andrew Senkevich wrote:
> > FWIW, I came across the same error in my own testing and raised
> > bug 78451.
>
> Can we fix it with the following patch? Regtesting in progress.
>
> PR target/78451
> * gcc/config/i386/avx5124fmapsintrin.h: Avoid call
On 11/21/16 18:50, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> Hi Bernd,
> Any update on the other patch you mentioned? This one breaks
> bootstrap of arm-linux-gnueabihf with certain options like
> "--with-arch=armv7-a --with-fpu=neon --with-float=hard".
> I created PR78453 for tracking.
>
> Thanks,
> bin
Oh, sorry.
Th
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:07:21PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:52:12PM -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:43:40PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > Could you also test with reload please? Just LE is enough I guess.
> > > We'd like t
One more gift to the retro-computing folks.
GCC for the m68k generates poor code for some relational comparisons
against 65536. Swapping the upper/lower halves of the register and
doing a word sized tst is faster on the 68000/68010 and smaller on all
variants. This doesn't work for all compa
On 21/11/16 15:21, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 21 November 2016 at 15:16, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
On 21/11/16 08:51, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Hi Christophe,
On 18 November 2016 at 17:51, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
On 11/11/16 14:35, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 08/11/16 13:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> On 11/18/16 12:58, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> On 17 November 2016 at 10:23, Kyrill Tkachov
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/11/16 12:58, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
Hi!
This patch enables the ldrd/strd peephole rules unconditionall
2016-11-21 20:12 GMT+03:00 Martin Sebor :
> On 11/20/2016 11:16 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:28:22PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On x8
On 10/08/2016 15:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From: Paolo Bonzini
>
> clang recently added a new warning -Wexpansion-to-defined, which
> warns when `defined' is used outside a #if expression (including the
> case of a macro that is then used in a #if expression).
>
> While I disagree with their
Hi all,
tree-ssa-loop-prefetch.c used to include expr.h so that optabs would work but
since the
optabs headers were cleaned up in the last (couple of?) releases it no longer
needs to do that
and expr.h is no longer included, but the stale FIXME comment is still there.
This patch removes it.
Co
Hi Matthias,
> ahh, didn't see that :-/ Now fixed, is this clearer now?
>
> The options @option{--with-target-bdw-gc-include} and
> @option{--with-target-bdw-gc-lib} must always specified together for
^ be
Rainer
--
On 11/21/16 10:40 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 21.11.2016 17:23, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 11/21/2016 05:57 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'm sure you didn't mean exactly the same --with-foo in all 3 places, but I'm a
dummy about what you really intended to say here.
ahh, didn't see that :-/ Now
On 11/20/2016 11:16 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:28:22PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On x86_64-linux with the 3 patches I'm not seeing any new FAILs
compared to befo
https://gcc.gnu.org/r242672
Committed this obvious code clean-up to avr.c and avr-c.c.
Johann
gcc/
* config/avr/avr-c.c (avr_register_target_pragmas): Use C++
for-loop declaration of loop variable.
(avr_register_target_pragmas, avr_cpu_cpp_builtins): Same.
* conf
On 21.11.2016 17:23, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
> On 11/21/2016 05:57 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>> --with-target-bdw-gc=/opt/bdw-gc,32=/opt/bdw-gc32
>>
>> sets the include and lib dirs by appending include and lib to the paths. If
>> you
>> have options --with-target-bdw-gc-include= and --with-tar
On 11/21/2016 05:57 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
--with-target-bdw-gc=/opt/bdw-gc,32=/opt/bdw-gc32
sets the include and lib dirs by appending include and lib to the paths. If you
have options --with-target-bdw-gc-include= and --with-target-bdw-gc-lib= as
well, it overrides the settings done in --w
Since this commit (r242639), I've noticed regressions on arm targets:
- PASS now FAIL [PASS => FAIL]:
gcc.dg/uninit-pred-6_a.c warning (test for warnings, line 36)
gcc.dg/uninit-pred-6_b.c warning (test for warnings, line 42)
gcc.dg/uninit-pred-7_c.c (test for excess errors
http://gcc.gnu.org/r242670
Committed as obvious code clean-up.
Johann
gcc/
* config/avr/avr.c (avr_popcount): Remove static function.
(avr_popcount_each_byte, avr_out_bitop): Use popcount_hwi instead.
Index: config/avr/avr.c
=
On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 15:47 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 11/18/2016 03:57 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 09:51 -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > > Martin: are the changes to your test cases OK by you, or is
> > > > there
> > > > a better way to rewrite them?
> > >
> > > Thank
The option -m[no-]apcs-float was never implemented in GCC. Since it
referred specifically to the FPA floating point co-processor which is
no-longer supported in GCC the option is now irrelevant. This patch
cleans up the hunks that were left behind.
* arm.opt (mapcs-float): Delete option
I missed the patch because the thread got too long. Also, I trust you
after all these years. :)
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
>>>Ok for mainline now and the backports after some soak time?
>>
>> Yes, the libstdc++ parts are OK, thanks.
>
> I assume Bruce is
> On 11/15/2016 05:46 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Yep, zero is definitly valid hash value:0
> >
> > Patch is OK. We may consider backporting it to release branches.
> > Honza
>
> Thanks, sending v2 as I found an error in the previous version.
> Changes from last version:
> - comments for ctors are
Hi,
I have been spending some time on this regression, where we ICE in
potential_constant_expression_1 because CLEANUP_STMT is unhandled.
Apparently the ICE started with
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=238559, where we
started calling maybe_constant_value from cp_fully
Committed this change in order to reduce the FAILs for AVR_TINY from
~3000 to ~2000. Rationale is to turn FAILs because of "relocation
truncated to fit" to UNSUPPORTED.
Johann
gcc/testsuite/
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_effective_target_tiny) [avr]:
Return 1 for AVR_TINY.
On 21/11/16 14:16, FX wrote:
>> it seems this broke ieee_8.f90 which tests compile time vs runtime value of
>> ieee_support_halting
>> if fortran needs this, then support_halting should be always false on arm
>> and aarch64.
>> but i'm not familiar enough with fortran to tell if there is some bet
On 21 November 2016 at 15:16, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
> On 21/11/16 08:51, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>
>> Hi Thomas,
>
>
> Hi Christophe,
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 18 November 2016 at 17:51, Thomas Preudhomme
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/11/16 14:35, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 08/11/16 13:36, T
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 06:46:21AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> 2016-11-18 Segher Boessenkool
>
> gcc/testsuite/
> PR rtl-optimization/71785
> * gcc.target/powerpc/pr71785.c: New file.
I have committed this now.
Segher
Dear Nagy,
> it seems this broke ieee_8.f90 which tests compile time vs runtime value of
> ieee_support_halting
> if fortran needs this, then support_halting should be always false on arm and
> aarch64.
> but i'm not familiar enough with fortran to tell if there is some better
> workaround.
Ca
On 21/11/16 08:51, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Hi Christophe,
On 18 November 2016 at 17:51, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
On 11/11/16 14:35, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 08/11/16 13:36, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Ping?
Best regards,
Thomas
On 25/10/16 18:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> If this just isn't something that should be documented in changes.html
> please let me know and I'll stop pinging.
Not at all! Apologies for not getting back to you earlier, I
am simply swamped with (non-GCC) stuff right now, and missed
this on my week
On Sun, 2016-11-13 at 18:45 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 05, 2016 at 10:50:57PM +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > The attached patch adds an explanation of the new
> > -Wshadow=(global|local|compatible-local) to gcc-7/changes.html.
> >
> > OK to commit?
>
> Ping?
If this just isn't so
Hi,
Currently, the interrupt_handler-bug-1.c test will fail on pre-R2 targets
because the "interrupt" function attribute requires at least an R2 target and
the test does not enforce this requirement.
This patch fixes this by adding the isa_rev>=2 option to the test's dg-options.
Tested with mips
On 21.11.2016 11:23, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
>> On 20 Nov 2016, at 20:42, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>> On 10.10.2016 09:58, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>>
>
>>> The point here was to simplify the dependent configury so that it only
>>> needs to test something that the configuring user specifies (i.e. if th
On 20 November 2016 at 18:27, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2016, at 1:59 PM, Andrew Burgess
> wrote:
>>> So, your new test fails on arm* targets:
>>
>> After a little digging I think the problem might be that
>> -freorder-blocks-and-partition is not supported on arm.
>>
>> This should be detec
On 21/11/16 15:17, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:09:30PM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:43:56AM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
This is just weird. DECL_NAME in theory could be NULL, or can be a symbol
m
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:10:28PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 09:29:26PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > On 10/31/2016 08:56 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> >
> > >combine_simplify_rtx() tries to replace rtx expressions with just two
> > >possible values with an experession tha
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> We treated this g as a sibling call to f:
>
> int f (int);
> int g (void) { return f (1); }
>
> but not this one:
>
> struct s { int i; };
> struct s f (int);
> struct s g (void) { return f (1); }
>
> We treated them both as si
On 21/11/16 15:17, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:09:30PM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:43:56AM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
This is just weird. DECL_NAME in theory could be NULL, or can be a symbol
m
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:09:30PM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:43:56AM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
> >> > This is just weird. DECL_NAME in theory could be NULL, or can be a
> >> > symbol
> >> > much longer than 1
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:43:56AM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
>> > This is just weird. DECL_NAME in theory could be NULL, or can be a symbol
>> > much longer than 100 bytes, at which point you have strlen (tmp_name) == 99
>> > and ASM_GENERA
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:43:56AM +, Yuri Gribov wrote:
> > This is just weird. DECL_NAME in theory could be NULL, or can be a symbol
> > much longer than 100 bytes, at which point you have strlen (tmp_name) == 99
> > and ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL will just misbehave.
> > I fail to see why
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:44:26AM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
>> this is the second attempt to support ASan odr indicators in GCC. I've fixed
>> issues with several flags (e.g.TREE_ADDRESSABLE) and introduced new "asan
>> odr indicator" a
The following patch deals with the testsuite fallout of the patch
forcing LOOP_VECTORIZED () versioning in GIMPLE if-conversion. We
no longer see the if-converted body when doing BB vectorization.
While the real fix would be to teach BB vectorization about
conditions (and thus if-conversion) its
Hi,
We have decided to backport this patch to make -mthumb optional for Thumb-only
targets to our embedded-6-branch.
*** gcc/ChangeLog.arm ***
2016-11-18 Thomas Preud'homme
Backport from mainline
2016-11-18 Terry Guo
Thomas Preud'homme
* c
On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:44:26AM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> this is the second attempt to support ASan odr indicators in GCC. I've fixed
> issues with several flags (e.g.TREE_ADDRESSABLE) and introduced new "asan
> odr indicator" attribute to distinguish indicators from other symbols.
> Look
Hi,
We have decided to backport this patch to fix a type inconsistency for
arm_feature_set to our embedded-6-branch.
*** gcc/ChangeLog.arm ***
2016-11-18 Thomas Preud'homme
Backport from mainline
2016-11-18 Thomas Preud'homme
* config/arm/arm-protos.h (FL_NONE,
Hi,
We have decided to backport this patch to fix a stack corruption when using lr
and high registers to our embedded-6-branch.
*** gcc/ChangeLog.arm ***
2016-11-08 Thomas Preud'homme
Backport from mainline
2016-11-08 Thomas Preud'homme
PR target/77933
Hi,
We have decided to backport this patch to fix a testsuite failure in newly added
test empty_fiq_handler to our embedded-6-branch.
*** gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.arm ***
2016-11-21 Thomas Preud'homme
Backport to mainline
2016-11-21 Thomas Preud'homme
* gcc.targ
Hi,
We have decided to backport this patch to fix an internal compiler error when
compiling an empty FIX interrupt handler to our embedded-6-branch.
*** gcc/ChangeLog.arm ***
2016-11-17 Thomas Preud'homme
Backport from mainline
2016-11-16 Thomas Preud'homme
* c
Hi,
I would like to ping the following patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01300.html.
-Maxim
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 04:54:17PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 04:53:03PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > The following two patches fix PR 77822 on s390x for gcc-7. As the
> > macro doing the argument range checks can be used on other targets
> > as well, I've put it in sys
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:29:18PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 08:02:08AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 01:09:24PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > > IN_RANGE(POS...) makes sure that POS is a non-negative number
> > > smaller than UPPER, so (UPP
On 17/11/16 20:04, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Hi Christophe,
On 17/11/16 13:36, Christophe Lyon wrote:
On 16 November 2016 at 10:39, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
On 09/11/16 16:19, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes the following ICE when building when compiling an empty
FIQ interrupt h
On Nov 21 2016, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Since this commit (r242639), I've noticed regressions on arm targets:
>
> - PASS now FAIL [PASS => FAIL]:
>
> gcc.dg/uninit-pred-6_a.c warning (test for warnings, line 36)
> gcc.dg/uninit-pred-6_b.c warning (test for warnings, line 42)
>
We treated this g as a sibling call to f:
int f (int);
int g (void) { return f (1); }
but not this one:
struct s { int i; };
struct s f (int);
struct s g (void) { return f (1); }
We treated them both as sibcalls on x86 before the first patch for PR36326,
so I suppose this is a regress
> On 20 Nov 2016, at 20:42, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> On 10.10.2016 09:58, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
>> The point here was to simplify the dependent configury so that it only needs
>> to test something that the configuring user specifies (i.e. if they specify
>> objc-gc, then they need also to s
Hi,
On 20 November 2016 at 17:36, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On 11/16/2016 03:57 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On 11/02/2016 11:16 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jeff.
>>>
>>> As discussed in the PR, here is a patch exploring your idea of ignoring
>>> unguarded uses if we can prove that the guar
On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> On 17 November 2016 at 15:24, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >
> >> On 17 November 2016 at 14:21, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Richard,
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>>
>>> B) Depending on ilp, I think below test strings fail for long time with
>>> haswell:
>>> ! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Executi
Hi Bruce,
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 2:45 AM, Rainer Orth
>> wrote:
>>> So the current suggestion is to combine my fixincludes patch and Jack's
>>> patch to disable use if !__BLOCKS__.
>>
>>> I guess this is ok for mainline now to restore bootst
Hi Mike,
> On Nov 18, 2016, at 2:45 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>> So the current suggestion is to combine my fixincludes patch and Jack's
>> patch to disable use if !__BLOCKS__.
>
>> I guess this is ok for mainline now to restore bootstrap?
>
> I think we are down to everyone likes this, Ok. The
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 07:41:58AM +, Michael Collison wrote:
> James,
>
> I incorporated all your suggestions, and successfully bootstrapped and re-ran
> the testsuite.
>
> Okay for trunk?
>
> 2016-11-18 Michael Collison
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64-protos.h
> (aarch64_and_s
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The if-conversion patch for PR77848 missed a case where an outer loop
> should not be versioned for vectorization; this was caught by an assert
> in tests recorded in https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78413.
> This patch fix
Hi Jonathan,
>>Ok for mainline now and the backports after some soak time?
>
> Yes, the libstdc++ parts are OK, thanks.
I assume Bruce is ok with the change to the hpux11_fabsf fix given that it
was suggested by the HP-UX maintainer and fixes fixincludes make check ;-)
Rainer
--
--
On 21/11/16 09:40, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
Hi,
I added the description of the new ARM -mpure-code option to changes.html.
Is this OK?
Cheers,
Andre
Ok.
Thanks,
Kyrill
Hi,
I added the description of the new ARM -mpure-code option to changes.html.
Is this OK?
Cheers,
Andre
Index: htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-7/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -r
On Sun, 20 Nov 2016, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> Hi,
> As suggested by Martin in PR78153 strlen's return value cannot exceed
> PTRDIFF_MAX.
> So I set it's range to [0, PTRDIFF_MAX - 1] in extract_range_basic()
> in the attached patch.
>
> However it regressed strlenopt-3.c:
>
> Consider fn1()
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:27:10AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch brings the new CPU support announcements in line with the format
> used in the GCC 6 notes. That is, rather than have a separate "The
> is now supported via the..." entry for each new core just list
> them a
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> With my previous patch the compiler ICEs if you use --enable-checking=df.
> This patch fixes it, by calling df_update_entry_exit_and_calls instead of
> df_update_entry_block_defs and df_update_exit_block_uses.
>
> Bootstrapped and check
On 18/11/16 18:19, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 03:37:17PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote:
Hi,
This patch set enables the _Float16 type specified in ISO/IEC TS 18661-3
for AArch64 and ARM. The patch set has been posted over the past two months,
with many of the target-indepen
Hi Thomas,
On 18 November 2016 at 17:51, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
> On 11/11/16 14:35, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/11/16 13:36, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
>>>
>>> Ping?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>> On 25/10/16 18:07, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
Hi,
Current
Hi,
On 17 November 2016 at 11:45, Kyrill Tkachov
wrote:
>
> On 17/11/16 10:31, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kyrill,
>>
>> On 17/11/16 10:11, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Andre,
>>>
>>> On 09/11/16 10:00, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
Tested the series by bootstrapping arm-non
99 matches
Mail list logo
