While the root solution for the bug is "don't do that", we should at
least try to detect the obviously wrong case more gracefully.
Committed.
* argv.c (expandargv): Check for directories passed as @-files.
Index: argv.c
===
Hi,
Please consider this as a personal reminder to review the patch
at following link and let me know your comments on the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02305.html
Thanks,
Naveen
Hi,
Please consider this as a personal reminder to review the patch
at following link and let me know your comments on the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02078.html
Thanks,
Naveen
Hi,
Please consider this as a personal reminder to review the patch
at following link and let me know your comments on the same.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00697.html
Thanks,
Naveen
Kelvin,
This version shows a lot of improvement.
(cmprb): New expansion.
(*cmprb): New insn.
(*setb): New insn.
(cmprb2): New expansion.
(*cmprb2): New insn.
(cmpeqb): New expansion.
(*cmpeqb): New insn.
The named and un-named patterns should have different names.
Technically, the names don't ha
On 11/29/2016 09:33 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
This fixes the gcc.dg/uninit-pred-6* failures I seem to have caused on
some non x86 platforms. Sorry for the delay.
The problem is that my fix for PR61409 had the logic backwards. I was
proving that all the uses of a PHI are invalidated by any one u
I lost track of this patch among all the others but I don't see
a reply to it in the archives.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02173.html
The only controversial part about this one that I recall was whether
object size type 0 or 1 should be used for raw memory functions like
memc
This patch adds built-in function support for the new setb, cmprb, and
cmpeqb Power9 instructions. This second version of the patch differs
from the first in the following ways:
1. Removed the UNSPEC_SETB new unspec value. Rewrote these patterns to
describe semantics in terms of primitive RTL.
On 12/05/2016 11:21 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 12/04/2016 04:55 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Bug 78519 points out that while the -Wformat warning flags a small
subset of sprintf calls with a null pointer argument to a %s directive
(those where the pointer is a constant) it misses the much bigger
set wher
On 12/05/2016 01:26 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:31:18PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
+static bool
+adjust_range_for_overflow (tree dirtype, tree *argmin, tree *argmax)
+{
+ if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (dirtype))
+{
+ *argmin = dirmin;
+ *argmax = dirmax;
+}
+
On 12/01/2016 09:10 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hello,
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:09:19PM +0100, Martin Jambor wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 10:17:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
...
So it seems that rather than an assert that we should just not walk down a
self-referencing DECL_ABSTRACT_ORIGIN.
The attached patch removes one error message and updates several test cases.
I split alloc_comp_constraint_1.f90 into two cases with the addition of
alloc_comp_constraint_7.f90. One gets different error messages depending on
which standard is invoked, f95 or f2003.
I will do an appropriate Ch
A recent change to enable signed vs. unsigned comparisons to be flagged as an
error broke the PowerPC bootstrap.
The issue was with the FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P macro. I changed it and the
FUNCTION_ARG_REGNO_P to both use IN_RANGE instead of doing a subtraction of the
first value and comparing it t
This patches fixes a regression in gcc.dg/zero_bits_compound-2.c. A recent
patch (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02392.html)
to the aarch64 backend improved generation for 'and' instructions with
constants. The patch changed the number of 'and' instruction generated
at the assembl
The new -Wformat-length warning pass detects and diagnoses non-
constant null format strings. This is in addition to (but not
in conflict with) -Wformat which is limited to detecting only
null constants.
A recently posted patch of mine also adds the detection of null
pointer arguments to the %s
On 12/05/2016 03:46 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Hi,
this fixes the regressions introduced on SPARC by the newly reenabled RTL
sharing verification. They come from the special treatment for CLOBBERs:
case CLOBBER:
/* Share clobbers of hard registers (like cc0), but do not share pseudo reg
On 12/02/2016 01:33 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
The LHS on the assignment makes it easier to identify when a tail call is
possible. It's not needed for correctness. Not having the LHS on the
assignment just means we won't get an optimized tail call.
Under what circumstances would the LHS possibl
Hi,
this fixes the regressions introduced on SPARC by the newly reenabled RTL
sharing verification. They come from the special treatment for CLOBBERs:
case CLOBBER:
/* Share clobbers of hard registers (like cc0), but do not share pseudo reg
clobbers or clobbers of hard registers
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Lynn A. Boger
wrote:
> I think you mean https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18200.
Yes, thanks, I meant to write https://golang.org/issue/18200.
Ian
> On 12/05/2016 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou
>> wrote:
>
> According to https://golang.org/cl/18200, this change broke Go on PPC64le.
Any other platform where this also happened?
> I haven't investigated myself and I don't know why. Go does not use
> stack trampolines for function closures. It does use function
> closures, but they are built on the h
Hi,
PR78646 identifies a case where the base expression for a strength-reduced
memory reference gets a type of insufficient alignment. This pointed out
the fact that we should use the type of the candidate expression for the
new base expression in all cases. Patch by Stefan M. Freudenberger.
Bo
Trying again, this time with changelog.
gcc/
2016-11-30 Allan Sandfeld Jensen
PR target/70118
* gcc/config/i386/mmintrin.h (__m64_u): New type
* gcc/config/i386/emmintrin.h (_mm_loadl_epi64, _mm_storel_epi64):
Make the allowed unaligned memory access explici
Thanks for the feedback. Updated patch is below.
The noexcept on definition and the declaration of constructors
_Sp_locker do not match.
ChangeLog
2016-12-05 Aditya Kumar
* src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc (_Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p)): Added
noexcept on constructors.
I think you mean https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18200.
- Lynn
On 12/05/2016 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
PR ada/37139
PR ada/67205
* common.opt (-ftrampolines): New option.
Hi!
As shown on the testcase, with K&R definitions and fn prototypes with
promoted types, we can end up computing caller's value ranges in wider
type than the parameter actually has in the function.
The problem with that is that wide_int_storage::from can actually wrap
around, so either as in the
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> 2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
>
> PR ada/37139
> PR ada/67205
> * common.opt (-ftrampolines): New option.
> * doc/invoke.texi (Code Gen Options): Document it.
> * doc/tm.texi.in (Trampolines): AddTARGET_
What's your target triple?
> On Dec 4, 2016, at 6:36 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
> On Nov 01 2016, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>
>> * gcc.target/powerpc/fold-vec-add-7.c: New.
>
> spawn -ignore SIGHUP /daten/gcc/gcc-20161203/Build/gcc/xgcc
> -B/daten/gcc/gcc-20161203/Build/gcc/
> /daten/gcc/gc
We were crashing on this invalid test because cp_parser_std_attribute_spec_seq
in cp_parser_statement returned error_mark_node, but the subsequent
attribute_fallthrough_p wasn't prepared for that.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2016-12-05 Marek Polacek
PR c++/78
Hi!
On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:31:18PM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> +static bool
> +adjust_range_for_overflow (tree dirtype, tree *argmin, tree *argmax)
> +{
> + if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (dirtype))
> +{
> + *argmin = dirmin;
> + *argmax = dirmax;
> +}
> + else
> +{
> + *argmi
Dear All,
It took me an excessively long time to realise that processing the
typespec for an explicitly typed module procedure was wiping out the
interface symbol and so preventing the comparison of characteristics
between the interface and the separate module procedure. Transferring
the module in
On 12/05/2016 11:09 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Jason, Martin.
looking at pr78635, I find it related to Martin's patch of 15-12-2015
dealing with flexible array members.
Martin's patch makes the following ill-formed:
struct Base {int m; char ary[];}; // ends in flexible array - OK
struct Derived
On 12/05/2016 11:25 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 12/05/2016 08:50 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/02/2016 08:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/02/2016 01:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Hi Martin,
PR 78521 notes that the gimple-ssa-sprintf pass doesn't do the right
thing (i.e., the -Wformat-length and -fpr
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:37:23AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/05/2016 11:30 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>We're already using std::min std::max, std::swap and others.
> >
> >Note we're not using std::min nor std::max. I gave this a sh
On 12/05/2016 11:30 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
We're already using std::min std::max, std::swap and others.
Note we're not using std::min nor std::max. I gave this a shot a while ago,
but it didn't pan out:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>
> >>Thanks for the heads up! I just looked at that code yesterday while
> >>analyzing bug 78608, wondering if it was safe. Now I know it isn't.
> >>I think it might be best to simply hand code the expression instead
> >>of taking a ch
Hi Tamar,
On 5 December 2016 at 16:32, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 05/12/16 10:39, Tamar Christina wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This patch fixes test failures on arm-none-eabi.
>> Poly64 was being used by files that were not supposed
>> to be testing poly64 types.
>>
>> I have added a new MACRO t
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:25:02AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> We're already using std::min std::max, std::swap and others.
Note we're not using std::min nor std::max. I gave this a shot a while ago,
but it didn't pan out:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg00886.html
Marek
On 12/05/2016 08:50 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/02/2016 08:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/02/2016 01:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Hi Martin,
PR 78521 notes that the gimple-ssa-sprintf pass doesn't do the right
thing (i.e., the -Wformat-length and -fprintf-return-value options
behave incorrec
On 12/04/2016 04:55 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Bug 78519 points out that while the -Wformat warning flags a small
subset of sprintf calls with a null pointer argument to a %s directive
(those where the pointer is a constant) it misses the much bigger
set where the pointer is not a constant but inste
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 11:32:15PM +0530, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
> So I had to check if SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT (rhs2) was call to strstr
> rather than rhs1.
Then you need to test both whether it is strstr (s, t) == s or
s == strstr (s, t).
> + gassign *ga = gimple_build_a
On 5 December 2016 at 23:40, Prathamesh Kulkarni
wrote:
> On 5 December 2016 at 23:38, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> On 12/05/2016 07:02 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>>>
>>> This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if
>>> strlen (t) is known.
>>
>>
>> That's not the same thing,
On 5 December 2016 at 23:38, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 12/05/2016 07:02 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>> This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if
>> strlen (t) is known.
>
>
> That's not the same thing, is it?
>
> s = "hello world", t = "hello":
> strstr (s, t) == s
Jason, Martin.
looking at pr78635, I find it related to Martin's patch of 15-12-2015
dealing with flexible array members.
Martin's patch makes the following ill-formed:
struct Base {int m; char ary[];}; // ends in flexible array - OK
struct Derived : Base {}; // base ends in flexible array -
On 12/05/2016 09:52 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
For VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P vectype the element type can have different
precision from TYPE_SIZE, which is what we use for the bitsize.
The following patch uses then some other integral type of that precision
before it is actually converted to lhs_t
On 12/05/2016 07:02 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if
strlen (t) is known.
That's not the same thing, is it?
s = "hello world", t = "hello":
strstr (s, t) == s, but not strcmp (s, t) == 0.
I think you'd want memcmp (s, t, strle
On 12/05/2016 10:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
As the testcase shows, we also want to fold "abcd" + 3 != NULL
at constant time. The following patch fixes that.
Additionally, I think if !indirect_base0 then we basically want to compare
whether the base0's value rather than address is non-NULL,
On 12/05/2016 10:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:55:05AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
On 12/05/2016 09:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c
broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++
Hi,
This patch folds strstr (s, t) eq/ne s to strcmp (s, t) eq/ne 0 if
strlen (t) is known.
One issue I came across was forwprop1 reverses the order of operands
in eq_expr below:
eg test-case:
_Bool f(char *s, int cond)
{
char *t1 = __builtin_strstr (s, "hello");
_Bool t2 = (t1 == s);
return
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:55:05AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/05/2016 09:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c
> >broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++
> >folks want to use).
> >
> >Fixed by h
On 12/05/2016 09:57 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The slightly less recent but also post-6 changes to move memchr
folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c and fold-const-call.c also broke
the constexpr handling, it now only constant folds calls that return NULL,
while previously it also handled r
On 12/05/2016 09:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c
broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++
folks want to use).
Fixed by handling it also in fold-const-call.c. Bootstrapped/regtested on
x86
On 12/01/2016 10:14 PM, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
Hi,
it would be nice if uclinux targets are allowed to enable posix threads.
Together with uClibc-ng/uClibc you can build m68k-nommu toolchain and enable
old Linuxthreads instead of NPTL/TLS. With following change it is possible to
build
boost, w
On 29/11/16 09:45, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 17/11/16 10:00, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Andre Vieira (lists)
>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This patch tackles the issue reported in PR71607. This patch takes a
>>> different approach for disabling the creatio
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Andrew Senkevich
wrote:
> 2016-12-02 21:31 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak :
>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Andrew Senkevich
>> wrote:
>>> 2016-11-11 22:14 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak :
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Andrew Senkevich
wrote:
> 2016-11-11 20:56
On 05/12/16 11:52, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC
>> intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective
>> instructions:
>>
>> +---
Hi!
As the testcase shows, we also want to fold "abcd" + 3 != NULL
at constant time. The following patch fixes that.
Additionally, I think if !indirect_base0 then we basically want to compare
whether the base0's value rather than address is non-NULL, which we can't
optimize. All we can optimize
On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC
> intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective
> instructions:
>
> +---+-
Hi!
The slightly less recent but also post-6 changes to move memchr
folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c and fold-const-call.c also broke
the constexpr handling, it now only constant folds calls that return NULL,
while previously it also handled returning first argument + constant offset.
Thi
On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor LDC and STC
> intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective
> instructions:
>
> ++
Hi!
The recent changes to move strchr folding from builtins.c to gimple-fold.c
broke constexpr handling with __builtin_strchr etc. (which the libstdc++
folks want to use).
Fixed by handling it also in fold-const-call.c. Bootstrapped/regtested on
x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2016-1
On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor CDP
> intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective
> instructions:
>
> ++
> Fixed by disabling the relevant alternatives in the few patterns using the
> constraint and replacing it with a simple r constraint. This yields a clean
> C testsuite in 32-bit mode.
There was a thinko in the patch: the U constraint cannot be just replaced with
r as-is, because it is matched w
Hi!
For VECTOR_BOOLEAN_TYPE_P vectype the element type can have different
precision from TYPE_SIZE, which is what we use for the bitsize.
The following patch uses then some other integral type of that precision
before it is actually converted to lhs_type (boolean_type_node).
Bootstrapped/regteste
On 05/12/16 15:05, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 01/12/16 17:25, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This patch refactors the implementation of the ARM ACLE CRC builtins to
>>> use the builtin framework.
>>>
>>> Is this OK for trunk?
>>>
On 01/12/16 17:25, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 17/11/16 10:42, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>> Hi Andre,
>>
>> On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Refactor NEON builtin framework such that it can be used to implement
>>> other builtins.
>>>
>>> Is this OK for trunk?
>>>
>>>
On 28/07/16 12:54, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Matthew Wahab
> wrote:
>> The ACLE intrinsics introduced to support the ARMv8.2 FP16 extensions
>> require that intrinsics for scalar (VFP) instructions are available
>> under different conditions from those for the
On 2016.11.30 at 08:17 +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> the patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-11/msg00246.html
> (the one going to gcc-patches was rejected due to size of
> regernerated files) contains one libgcc change, which exposes
> the __cpu_model interface fox i386 t
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 08:50:08AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> I posted a bigger patch to fix this and other related problems on
> Friday (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg00262.html).
> In hindsight, I should have probably committed the fix for this
> on its own. Please let me know
On 12/02/2016 08:52 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 12/02/2016 01:31 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Hi Martin,
PR 78521 notes that the gimple-ssa-sprintf pass doesn't do the right
thing (i.e., the -Wformat-length and -fprintf-return-value options
behave incorrectly) when a conversion specification includes
On 05/12/16 10:39, Tamar Christina wrote:
Hi All,
This patch fixes test failures on arm-none-eabi.
Poly64 was being used by files that were not supposed
to be testing poly64 types.
I have added a new MACRO that must be defined in addition
to having CRYPTO available before use of Poly64 types a
On 01/12/16 17:25, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 09/11/16 10:11, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch refactors the implementation of the ARM ACLE CRC builtins to
>> use the builtin framework.
>>
>> Is this OK for trunk?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andre
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog
>> 2016-11-09 A
2016-12-02 21:31 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak :
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Andrew Senkevich
> wrote:
>> 2016-11-11 22:14 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak :
>>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Andrew Senkevich
>>> wrote:
2016-11-11 20:56 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak :
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Ur
Using leaf_function_p in a backend is dangerous as it incorrectly returns
false if it is called while in a sequence (for example during prolog/epilog
generation). Replace all uses with crtl->is_leaf as this is now initialized
early enough in ira.c. This typically causes no code generation differe
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 07:56:46AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > Sorry for breaking this. With the constant changes in the
> > patterns this is supposed to fix it seems I've lost track of the
> > status quo. I'll check what we
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> Sorry for breaking this. With the constant changes in the
> patterns this is supposed to fix it seems I've lost track of the
> status quo. I'll check what went wrong with the patch; in the
> mean time Andreas will revert this, or if
Hi,
this was the latest version of my patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02796.html
Thanks
Bernd.
Hi all,
the attached patch does not fix an actual bug, but merely does some
cleanup, geting rid of some code duplication. It removes the function
gfc_convert_chartype and merges its functionality into the more
general gfc_convert_type_warn.
Regtests cleanly on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
Che
The AVX-specific matmul patch for libgfortran broke Solaris/x86 testing
with /bin/as pretty badly: every single execution test involving
libgfortran.so now FAILs like
ld.so.1: alloc_comp_1.exe: fatal:
/var/gcc/regression/trunk/10-gcc/build/i386-pc-solaris2.10/./libgfortran/.libs/libgfortran.so.4:
Hi Dominique, hi all,
@Dominique: Thanks for testing. I have extended my usual testcycle to add the
libgomp.fortran tests.
I could fix the errors below by calling deallocate_with_status directly from
the trans_omp_*-routines instead of using the gfc_array_deallocate wrapper.
While being at it, I
On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 04:00 -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 07:19:13PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > >
> > > [ I did not see this patch before, sorry. ]
> > >
> > > This causes the second half
On 12/02/2016 09:07 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
Arguments should be documented.
I really must get into the habit of adding FIXME when writing dev comments.
+ if (count >= (int) context->max_errors)
Looks like there are some unnecessary type mismatches leading to this
cast. Maybe declare max
Remove old gmonlib from libgcc and reimplemnt profiling using UCB
counters.
gcc/
2016-07-28 Claudiu Zissulescu
* config/arc/arc.h (LINK_SPEC): Tidy up.
(ENDFILE_SPEC): Likewise.
(LIB_SPEC): Likewise.
(STARTFILE_SPEC): Include gcrt0 when profiling.
(FUNCT
Cleanup old patterns.
gcc/
2016-10-10 Claudiu Zissulescu
* config/arc/arc.md (call_prof): Remove.
(call_value_prof): Likewise.
(sibcall_prof): Likewise.
(sibcall_value_prof): Likewise.
---
gcc/config/arc/arc.md | 63 -
This series of two patches reimplements ARC's profiling support in a
sustainable way.
First, we remove the old gmon lib implementation and its dependencies
from gcc and libgcc. This old implementation was partially working
only for A7xx type of processors, and only for bare-metal type of
applicati
On 09/11/16 10:12, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch implements support for the ARM ACLE Coprocessor MCR and MRC
> intrinsics. See below a table mapping the intrinsics to their respective
> instructions:
>
> +---+-
On 30/11/16 12:06, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I changed the testcase with this patch since the old testcase was
> casting a function pointer to another function pointer and using that
> pointer to call the function. This is undefined behavior. The new test
> reflects a more sane use of
On 02/12/16 13:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> On 02/12/16 13:36, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> On 23/11/16 11:53, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>>> On 11/11/16 16:19, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
And CC'ing Ramana and Richard this time...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> After some extra testing I fou
On 30/11/16 17:22, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 30/11/16 12:05, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got a bug report against the old version of this patch and fixed it
>> here. This had to do with GCC optimizations sharing types with and
>> without the 'cmse_nonsecure_call' attribute. The
On 30/11/16 17:22, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 30/11/16 15:32, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> On 23/11/16 11:52, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> After some extra testing I realized there was an issue with the way we
>>> were clearing registers when returning from a cmse_nonsecure_entr
On 27/10/16 10:55, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 26/10/16 11:03, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>> Hi Andre,
>>
>> On 25/10/16 17:28, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>>> On 25/07/16 14:23, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
This patch extends support for the ARMv8-M Security Extensions
'cmse_nonsecure_ent
On 27/10/16 11:19, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 27/10/16 10:54, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> On 26/10/16 17:28, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>> On 26/10/16 17:28, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
On 26/10/16 10:33, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> +static tree
> +arm_handle_cmse_nonsecure_entry (tree *
On 27/10/16 11:01, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> On 27/10/16 10:53, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
>> On 26/10/16 14:00, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>>> On 26/10/16 10:12, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi Andre, thanks for resending them.
On 25/10/16 17:26, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote:
> On 24/08/16
[CC'ing James]
On 23/11/16 05:25, Hurugalawadi, Naveen wrote:
Hi,
Please find attached the patch that fixes PR71112.
The current implementation that handles SYMBOL_SMALL_GOT_28K in
aarch64_load_symref_appropriately access the high part of RTX for Big-Endian
mode which results in ICE for ILP32.
Hi,
> > * config/arc/arc.md (ls_gd_load): Remove.
> > (tls_gd_dispatch): Likewise.
>
> I don't see the connection between these two parts? Plus it would be
> nice to have some more words _somewhere_ for why these are being
> removed. The commit message is probably the right place I'd ha
> gcc/config.gcc | 2 +-
> gcc/config/arc/arc.h | 10 --
> libgcc/config.host | 4 ++--
> libgcc/config/arc/crti.S | 2 ++
Approved and committed, thank you for your contribution,
Claudiu
Iain Sandoe privately reported that the overhaul of the system files had
broken the Ada compiler on Power/Darwin 32-bit. Applied on the mainline.
2016-12-05 Eric Botcazou
* system-darwin-ppc.ads (Support_Atomic_Primitives): Set to True only
if the word size is 64.
--
Eric
Hi All,
This patch fixes test failures on arm-none-eabi.
Poly64 was being used by files that were not supposed
to be testing poly64 types.
I have added a new MACRO that must be defined in addition
to having CRYPTO available before use of Poly64 types are
allowed in the header arm-neon-ref.h.
Ok
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 04:00:25AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 07:19:13PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > [ I did not see this patch before, sorry. ]
> > >
> > > This causes the second half of P
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:37:41AM +, Tamar Christina wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> This patch fixes test failures on aarch64-none-linux-gnu.
> Some vreinterpret intrinsics which are required for some of
> the tests to run were missing.
>
> Bootstrapped and reg tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu.
>
Hi All,
This patch fixes test failures on aarch64-none-linux-gnu.
Some vreinterpret intrinsics which are required for some of
the tests to run were missing.
Bootstrapped and reg tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu.
Ok for trunk?
gcc/
2016-12-01 Tamar Christina
* gcc/config/aarch64/arm
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
