Re: [Patch, fortran] PR121182 - F2018 GENERIC statement is missing

I forgot to include subroutine tests. Please find attached the patch with updated testcases. Paul On Wed, 23 Jul 2025 at 17:53, Paul Richard Thomas < paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > The attached implements the F2018 generic statement, which has the same > semantics as the typ

Re: [PATCH] [aarch64] Make better use of overflowing operations in max/min(a, add/sub(a, b)) [PR116815]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 10:16 PM wrote: > > From: Dhruv Chawla > > This patch folds the following patterns: > - max (a, add (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = adds (a, b); !ovf ? sum : a > - min (a, add (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = adds (a, b); !ovf ? a : sum > - max (a, sub (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = subs (a, b);

Re: [PATCH] configure: reject unsupported --with-long-double-64 option

On 23/07/25 10:25 pm, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> ChangeLog: >> * configure: Regenerate. >> * configure.ac: error out on --with-long-double-64. > Capital E, "Error". And put this line before the > "configure: Regenerate." line please. Okay. > In as far as this is just for rs6000, ok

[PATCH] [aarch64] Make better use of overflowing operations in max/min(a, add/sub(a, b)) [PR116815]

From: Dhruv Chawla This patch folds the following patterns: - max (a, add (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = adds (a, b); !ovf ? sum : a - min (a, add (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = adds (a, b); !ovf ? a : sum - max (a, sub (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = subs (a, b); !ovf ? a : sum - min (a, sub (a, b)) -> [sum, ovf] = s

[PING^1][PATCH v4] rs6000: Adding missed ISA 3.0 atomic memory operation instructions.

Ping! please review. Thanks & Regards Jeevitha On 02/07/25 11:50 am, jeevitha wrote: > Hi All, > > The following patch has been bootstrapped and regtested on powerpc64le-linux. > > Changes from V3: > * Replaced named operands with positional operands in inline assembly for > better readabilit

[PATCH] [hardbool] implement OP=, ++ and --, volatile and atomics

hardbools didn't behave quite like bools when incremented, decremented, or otherwise modified using their previous value, as in += et al. Fix that. Also fix some checking errors that come up when using qualified base types. Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok to install? for gcc/c-family/C

Re: [PATCH] c++: more name lookup for non-dep rewritten cmp ops

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 7/23/25 3:46 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > > As a follow-up to r16-2448-g7590c14b53a762, this patch attempts to teach > > build_min_non_dep_op_overload how to rebuild all rewritten comparison > > operators, not just != -> == ones, so that we don't incorr

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 2:11 PM Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2025, Martin Uecker wrote: > > IMHO there are enough reasons to reject delayed parsing > > as bad design for C. We should work towards proper > > language features that cleanly fit into the language, > > instead of pushing the b

Re: [PATCH] c++: more name lookup for non-dep rewritten cmp ops

On 7/23/25 3:46 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: As a follow-up to r16-2448-g7590c14b53a762, this patch attempts to teach build_min_non_dep_op_overload how to rebuild all rewritten comparison operators, not just != -> == ones, so that we don't incorrectly repeat the unqualified name lookup at instantiati

Re: [PATCH] Determine CONSTRAINT_LEN at run-time [PR121214]

Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus writes: > Tests gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-error-{4,5}.c ICE on sparc*-sun-solaris2.11 > since in tm-preds.h we have > > #define CONSTRAINT_LEN(c_,s_) 1 > > and, therefore, do not parse hard register constraints correctly. > Hard register constraints are non-single character

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025, Martin Uecker wrote: > IMHO there are enough reasons to reject delayed parsing > as bad design for C. We should work towards proper > language features that cleanly fit into the language, > instead of pushing the boundaries with macros. At the last WG14 meeting it was said t

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

Am Mittwoch, dem 23.07.2025 um 12:58 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 11:22 PM Martin Uecker wrote: > > Am Montag, dem 21.07.2025 um 16:03 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling: > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 2:19 PM Martin Uecker wrote: > > > > ... > > > > Please give an example of

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

Am Mittwoch, dem 23.07.2025 um 11:53 + schrieb Aaron Ballman: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 5:47 AM Martin Uecker wrote: > > > > This is a personal stance of mine, not a Clang community response. > > > > But this requires true collaboration, which can not > > exist when one side is not able to

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

Am Mittwoch, dem 23.07.2025 um 12:34 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 10:47 PM Martin Uecker wrote: > > IMHO there are enough reasons to reject delayed parsing > > as bad design for C. We should work towards proper > > language features that cleanly fit into the language, >

Re: [PATCH] c++: more name lookup for non-dep rewritten cmp ops

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025, Patrick Palka wrote: > As a follow-up to r16-2448-g7590c14b53a762, this patch attempts to teach > build_min_non_dep_op_overload how to rebuild all rewritten comparison > operators, not just != -> == ones, so that we don't incorrectly repeat > the unqualified name lookup at ins

[PATCH v7] Provide new option -fdiagnostics-show-context=N for -Warray-bounds, -Wstringop-* warnings [PR109071, PR85788, PR88771, PR106762, PR108770, PR115274, PR117179]

Hi, This is the 7th version of the patches for fixing PR109071. Adding -fdiagnotics-show-context=N into GCC to provide context information to the end users on how the warnings come from, in order to help the user to locate the exact location in source code on the specific warnings due to compiler

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 06:40:07PM +0200, Martin Uecker wrote: > Am Mittwoch, dem 23.07.2025 um 00:30 -0700 schrieb Kees Cook: > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 07:47:11AM +0200, Martin Uecker wrote: > ... > > > > > How would GCC want to define the syntax for expressions here? I still > > think it shou

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 11:22 PM Martin Uecker wrote: > Am Montag, dem 21.07.2025 um 16:03 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling: > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 2:19 PM Martin Uecker wrote: > > > Am Montag, dem 21.07.2025 um 04:29 -0700 schrieb Bill Wendling: > > > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 4:41 AM Martin Uec

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 04:28:36PM +, Qing Zhao wrote: > > > > On Jul 23, 2025, at 03:30, Kees Cook wrote: > > > > > > How would GCC want to define the syntax for expressions here? I still > > think it should be possible to wire up something that matches it in > > Clang, even if it is a "r

Re: [PATCH] c++, coroutines: Handle allocation fail return objects [PR121219].

On 7/23/25 11:45 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote: This is needed to be able to back-port the rest of the CWG2563 work to GCC-15.2, so I've prioritised it. So far, tested on x86_64 darwin, OK for trunk (and backport) if it passes wider testing? thanks Iain --- 8< --- The current implementation was returni

Re: [Fortran, Coarray] Call-out to everyone having Fortran coarray-codes available

On 7/22/25 20:45, Toon Moene wrote: Using my build [Debian Testing on x86_64)] of the branch provided by Jerry (see https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2025- July/853295.html) I got the following: I used Thomas's "sync all" code as an example (see https://gcc.gnu.org/ pipermail/for

[PATCH] c++: more name lookup for non-dep rewritten cmp ops

As a follow-up to r16-2448-g7590c14b53a762, this patch attempts to teach build_min_non_dep_op_overload how to rebuild all rewritten comparison operators, not just != -> == ones, so that we don't incorrectly repeat the unqualified name lookup at instantiation time. While working on this I noticed w

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 11:53:40AM +, Aaron Ballman wrote: > That said, John McCall pointed out some usage patterns Apple has with > their existing feature: > > * 655 simple references to variables or struct members: __counted_by(len) > * 73 dereferences of variables or struct members: __count

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 10:47 PM Martin Uecker wrote: > IMHO there are enough reasons to reject delayed parsing > as bad design for C. We should work towards proper > language features that cleanly fit into the language, > instead of pushing the boundaries with macros. You've mentioned one reaso

[PATCH, V4] Add -mcpu=future to the PowerPC

This patch adds the support that can be used in developing GCC support for future PowerPC processors. This support is done by adding support for CPU ISA bits that are set directly via the -mcpu= option, without having a -m bit. 2025-07-23 Michael Meissner gcc/ * config.gcc (powerpc*-

Re: [PATCH] Fortran: fix passing of character length of function to procedure [PR121203]

Am 22.07.25 um 23:54 schrieb Jerry D: On 7/22/25 11:28 AM, Harald Anlauf wrote: Dear all, the attached patch fixes a long-standing issue with legacy code, where an assumed-length character function is passed as actual argument to a procedure, and when there is no explicit interface. The solutio

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

Jakub, Richard and Joseph, Could you please help on the question below: Whether it’s able to distinguish a reference “p->f” is a read from or a write to in C FE? Please see the following example: > On Jul 23, 2025, at 13:19, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > On 2025-07-23 13:11, Qing Zhao wrot

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

On 2025-07-23 13:11, Qing Zhao wrote: On Jul 23, 2025, at 12:55, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: On 2025-07-23 11:08, Qing Zhao wrote: We always generate a call to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE for every f->p whatever it’s a reference or a definition in C FE parser. (This is the case for FAM) Hmm, that's

Re: [PATCH] switch-conversion: Reject VLA vector types [PR121091]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:37 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 10:05 AM Richard Sandiford > wrote: > > > > Andrew Pinski writes: > > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 12:03 AM Richard Biener > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 7:57 PM Andrew Pinski > > >> wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

> On Jul 23, 2025, at 12:55, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > On 2025-07-23 11:08, Qing Zhao wrote: >> We always generate a call to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE for every f->p whatever it’s >> a reference >> or a definition in C FE parser. (This is the case for FAM) > > Hmm, that's not correct then and I h

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] Add -ftarget-clones-table option support

On 30/6/2025 02:57, Yangyu Chen wrote: This patch adds support for target_clones table option. The target_clones table option allows users to specify multiple versions of a function and select the version at runtime based on the specified table. The target clone table is a JSON object where f

Re: [PATCH] zlib: import zlib-1.3.1

Jeff Law writes: > On 7/20/25 6:54 PM, Sam James wrote: >> This is vanilla zlib-1.3.1 imported over the existing zlib/ dir with: >> * README adjusted to add the GCC note at the top; >> * GCC's ChangeLog merged with the upstream one, as before; >> * Deleted upstream Makefile as has been done befor

Re: [PATCH] configure: reject unsupported --with-long-double-64 option

Hi! On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 01:51:18PM +0530, Kishan Parmar wrote: > Configure script previously accepted unsupported --with-long-double-64 > option without any warning, leading to confusion. This option was > mistakenly documented in install.texi but never handled by configure > scri

[RFC PATCH 2/2] Fortran: removed RTL at function start

This patch removed `make_decl_rtl` at function start. Making RTL at start leads to fixed suffix and assmbly name in the constant pool. It will finally be called in all my testcases since we will check it whenever using the DECL_RTL macro. Signed-off-by: ZAMBAR gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: *

[RFC PATCH 0/2] Fortran: multi-target clones Attribute Support

This patch is an experimental implementation of multi-target clones clones for Fortran, allowing the use of the `TARGET_CLONES` attribute. It is designed to work with the syntax like: `!GCC$ ATTRIBUTES TARGET_CLONES("default", "avx", "avx512f") :: MySub` It is now worked with both `SUBROUTINE

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

On 2025-07-23 11:08, Qing Zhao wrote: We always generate a call to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE for every f->p whatever it’s a reference or a definition in C FE parser. (This is the case for FAM) Hmm, that's not correct then and I have been misreading the code all this while; .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE does not

[RFC PATCH 1/2] Fortran: target clones basic support

This patch enables passing TARGET_CLNOES as a GCC attribute, which allows C-style argument syntax: `!GCC$ ATTRIBUTES TARGET_CLONES("default", "avx", "avx512f") :: MySub` or `!GCC$ ATTRIBUTES TARGET_CLONES('default', 'avx512f') :: MySub` This feature added a parser in f95-lang.cc to support par

[Patch, fortran] PR121182 - F2018 GENERIC statement is missing

Hi All, The attached implements the F2018 generic statement, which has the same semantics as the typebound version but can appear in any specification statement. As it says in the first comment in the patch, use is made of the existing, typebound matching functions to obtain access-spec and gener

[PATCH] contrib: add 'zlib' to ignored_prefixes

This fixes the same problem for syncing zlib that H.J. hit for libffi in r12-4561-g25ab851dd333d7. contrib/ChangeLog: PR other/105404 * gcc-changelog/git_commit.py (ignored_prefixes): Add zlib/. --- Committed as obvious. Thank you to pinskia for the hint and iains for rubberduckin

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

Am Mittwoch, dem 23.07.2025 um 00:30 -0700 schrieb Kees Cook: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 07:47:11AM +0200, Martin Uecker wrote: ... > > How would GCC want to define the syntax for expressions here? I still > think it should be possible to wire up something that matches it in > Clang, even if it is

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] Delayed parsing for bounds safety attributes

> On Jul 23, 2025, at 03:30, Kees Cook wrote: > > > How would GCC want to define the syntax for expressions here? I still > think it should be possible to wire up something that matches it in > Clang, even if it is a "redundant" syntax within Clang (i.e. Clang can > support 2 way to handle exp

[PATCH v5] Implement Philox Engine [PR119794]

Implements Philox Engine (P2075R6) and associated tests. Implements additional feedback from v4 from Patrick Palka. While fixing the carry bit propagation, I noted an issue for the limb carry reset as well, which has been fixed, plus I snagged some accidental whitespace that survived in random.h

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Rework broadcast handling [PR121073].

Note that your pr121073 test fails :-) So you'll need to adjust something there. OK with pr121073.c fixed... Pushed with -mabi=lp64d. There's nothing I have forgotten more often... -- Regards Robin

Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] Add EHB after last load if branch within 16 inst.

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:11 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] Performance degradation for iDCT-4M example

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:11 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] Test float32-basic.c fails with -mabi=64 -EB

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:11 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

[PATCH] Determine CONSTRAINT_LEN at run-time [PR121214]

Tests gcc.dg/asm-hard-reg-error-{4,5}.c ICE on sparc*-sun-solaris2.11 since in tm-preds.h we have #define CONSTRAINT_LEN(c_,s_) 1 and, therefore, do not parse hard register constraints correctly. Hard register constraints are non-single character constraints and require insn_constraint_len() in

Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] MIPSR6: Fix ICE occurred in R6 target

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:11 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

[PATCH] c++, coroutines: Handle allocation fail return objects [PR121219].

This is needed to be able to back-port the rest of the CWG2563 work to GCC-15.2, so I've prioritised it. So far, tested on x86_64 darwin, OK for trunk (and backport) if it passes wider testing? thanks Iain --- 8< --- The current implementation was returning the result of the g_r_o_o_a_f call inde

Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] Inefficient scattered complex load with MSA

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:11 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] MIPSR6: Define new R6 FPU instructions

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:11 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 18/18] Check anti-dependence between 0 and 3 for loads

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 17/18] Implement synthesised conditional xor/or

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 16/18] Inefficient 64-bit signed modulo by powers of two

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 15/18] Inefficient scattered double precision load in MSA

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 14/18] Test solution on dspmac builtins

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 13/18] Make rtl if-conversion more common

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 12/18] Load/store bonding improvements

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 11/18] Add -minline-intermix to ignore mips16/nomips16

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH] vect: Add target hook to prefer gather/scatter instructions

> Am 23.07.2025 um 16:09 schrieb Andrew Stubbs : > > On 23/07/2025 14:52, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 3:24 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: >>> >>> On 23/07/2025 13:24, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:51 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > From: Julian Bro

Re: [PATCH v2 10/18] Add -march=interaptiv-mr2 with MIPS16E2

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 09/18] Improve inlined memcpy

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 08/18] Add -mfunc-opt-list=

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Do not set STMT_VINFO_VECTYPE from dataref analysis

The following (on top of what I sent yesterday and on top of your four vectype patches) "passed" regtesting just now. I do see regressions for zve32x-3.c et al. Those might be related to the recently fixed tests regarding partial vectorization with vector(1) types but I haven't checked furthe

Re: [PATCH v2 07/18] Add -munique-sections feature

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Ping: [PATCH] builtins.cc (fold_builtin_bit_query): Don't consider MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE, [PR120935]

Ping! On Mon, 14 Jul 2025, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Tested to fix build for MMIX (and to fix a few type-generic-builtin > test-cases; c-c++-common/pr111309-1.c, gcc.dg/torture/pr116480-1.c). > Also regtested cris-elf and native x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. > > Ok for master and gcc-15? > > -- >8 --

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

> On Jul 23, 2025, at 10:12, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > On 2025-07-23 10:00, Qing Zhao wrote: >>> I can't see how this could happen, do you have an example test case? >> The example used in my previous writeup show this: >> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/689663.html >> f

Re: [PATCH v2 06/18] Add -msdata-num and -msdata-opt-list support

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 05/18] Add support for -mdead-loads

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 04/18] Add microMIPS R6 support

Public Hi, > Umm, this change can't go forward I'm afraid without microMIPSr6 > support landing in binutils first. Otherwise we have no consumer > for compiled code available. We have sent a patch series to binutils: https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2025-April/140356.html It includes a

Re: [PATCH v2 03/18] Add support for -mclib=[newlib,small,tiny]

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 02/18] Hazard barrier return support

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:18 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 01/18] Multilib changes

Public Hi, > So I'm not at all concerned about the mips specific bits of this patch. > After all, they only affect mips ports and the changes seem sensible. > They would need a ChangeLog entry to go forward through. > What is concerning is the config.ml change which has no comments about > what

Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] fmadd.w should be restricted to mipsr6

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 10/12] Fix register spill issue for soft-float glibc 2.29

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 09/12] Add -mmxu and -mno-mxu driver pass through

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 06/12] Frame barrier fix

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] Lightweight fix for shrink-wrapping inhibition

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

On 2025-07-23 10:00, Qing Zhao wrote: I can't see how this could happen, do you have an example test case? The example used in my previous writeup show this: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-July/689663.html f->p = malloc (size); * With the approach B: the IL for the above is

Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] Testsuite: Disable the time-profiler-2.c test

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent.

[PATCH] libstdc++: Expand compile-time ranges tests for vector and basic_string.

This replaces most test_constexpr invocations with direct calls to test_ranges(), which is also used for runtime tests. SimpleAllocator was made constexpr to simplify this refactoring. Other test allocators, like uneq_allocator (used in from_range constructor tests), were not updated. libstdc++-v

Re: [PATCH] vect: Add target hook to prefer gather/scatter instructions

On 23/07/2025 14:52, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 3:24 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: On 23/07/2025 13:24, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:51 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: From: Julian Brown This patch was originally written by Julian in 2021 for the OG10 branch, but

Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] Testsuite: Use HAS_LDC instead of a specific ISA

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] Improve store_by_pieces_p

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:21 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent.

Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/120929: Limit MEM_REF handling to .ACCESS_WITH_SIZE

> On Jul 22, 2025, at 20:12, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > [Apologies if I've missed some context in my reading since I'm coming back to > this after a big break] > > On 2025-07-22 12:33, Qing Zhao wrote: >> Why it's wrong to pass the VALUE of the original pointer as the first >> argument t

Re: [PATCH v2 02/12] Fix unsafe comparison against stack_pointer_rtx

Public Hi, > > GCC can modify a rtx which was created using stack_pointer_rtx. > > This means that just doing a straight address comparision of a rtx > > against stack_pointer_rtx to see whether it is the stack pointer > > register will not be correct in all cases. > Umm, no. There is one and on

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Do not set STMT_VINFO_VECTYPE from dataref analysis

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025, Robin Dapp wrote: > Generally, nobody is really happy with it :) It has been limping along > for a while and not been used a lot at all. > > > I also see it does compute post-dominators and scrap them for each > > costing done! For larger functions with many loops that's go

Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] Testsuite: Fix tests properly for compact-branches

Public Hi, > This likely needs to be updated for the trunk. > Before: > === gcc Summary === > # of expected passes95 > # of unexpected failures25 > After: > === gcc Summary === > # of expected passes70 > # of unexpected fail

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] aarch64: Stop using sys/ifunc.h header in libatomic and libgcc

On 7/23/25 04:45, Yury Khrustalev wrote: External email: Use caution opening links or attachments This optional header is used to bring in the definition of the struct __ifunc_arg_t type. Since it has been added to glibc only recently, the previous implementation had to check whether this heade

Re: [PATCH] vect: Add target hook to prefer gather/scatter instructions

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 3:24 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > On 23/07/2025 13:24, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:51 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: > >> > >> From: Julian Brown > >> > >> This patch was originally written by Julian in 2021 for the OG10 branch, > >> but does not appear to

RE: [PATCH v1 0/2] Avoid RVV fixed insn VX combine pollute VXRM

Thanks Jeff. > Presumably with the way this has been implemented, it looks like adding > vasub ought to be pretty easy. Just add it to the > expand_vx_binary_vxrm_* routines, the appropriate iterator and tests, > right? Absolutely yes, just like what we do in previous. Pan -Original M

Re: [PATCH] vect: Add target hook to prefer gather/scatter instructions

On 23/07/2025 13:24, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:51 PM Andrew Stubbs wrote: From: Julian Brown This patch was originally written by Julian in 2021 for the OG10 branch, but does not appear to have been proposed for upstream at that time, or since. I've now forward ported

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Do not set STMT_VINFO_VECTYPE from dataref analysis

Hmm, we only have one STMT_VINFO_VECTYPE in need_additional_vector_vars_p. I think we can just save the mode/vectype we need during add_stmt_cost and get it later, similar to STMT_VINFO_TYPE. Testing a patch. -- Regards Robin

Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] Avoid RVV fixed insn VX combine pollute VXRM

On 7/22/25 11:06 PM, pan2...@intel.com wrote: From: Pan Li The RVV fixed point insn VX combine should focus on the insn itself, instead of any standard name like avg_floor, the vxrm should be the value of insn as is. The below test suites are passed for this patch series. * The rv64gcv full

[committed] cobol: Tweak adjustments to location_t of GENERIC nodes for

Subject: [PATCH] cobol: Tweak adjustments to location_t of GENERIC nodes for PERFORM. COBOL has a group of PERFORM statements that require careful adjustments to the location_t elements of the GENERIC nodes so that the COBOL-aware version of GDB behaves properly. These changes are in service of

Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] nanoMIPS: unnecessary AND following an EXT

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:23 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent...

Re: [PATCH v2 09/10] Remove redundant moves

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:23 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] Testsuite: Skip tests making calls to variables

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:23 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] Testsuite: Adjust tests to cope with -mips16

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:23 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] Testsuite: Fix insn-*.c tests from trunk

Public Hi, Could you please let us know if you have any comments on this patch? Kind regards, Aleksandar Rakic From: Aleksandar Rakic Sent: Monday, March 17, 2025 2:23 PM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Djordje Todorovic; c...@mips.com; richard.guent..

  1   2   >