On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
>> This is a follow-up to
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01310.html, which
>> backported the POWER-specific little-endian swap optimization pass to
>> the 4.9 branch. We also need to backport this to the 4.8 branch. This
>>
Oops. Fixed post title.
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:23 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a follow-up to
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01310.html, which
> backported the POWER-specific little-endian swap optimization pass to
> the 4.9 branch. We also need to backport th
Hi,
This is a follow-up to
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01310.html, which
backported the POWER-specific little-endian swap optimization pass to
the 4.9 branch. We also need to backport this to the 4.8 branch. This
patch does that.
The patch is very similar to the 4.9 backport,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While working on a backport, I discovered a bug that only exists in the
> 4.8 branch (the buggy code was rewritten with the direct move additions
> in 4.9). A load-and-extract of the first doubleword in memory can
> always be done wi
Hi,
While working on a backport, I discovered a bug that only exists in the
4.8 branch (the buggy code was rewritten with the direct move additions
in 4.9). A load-and-extract of the first doubleword in memory can
always be done with the lxsd[u]x instruction. In 4.8 I wrongly added
code to use t
> Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> > #define rs6000_special_adjust_field_align_p(FIELD, COMPUTED) 0
> >
> > is what succeeds for me. false is not defined for ObjC. Checked in on the
> > trunk
> > and the branches.
>
> Since we didn't backport the actual ABI change to the branches, only the
> warning,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> #define rs6000_special_adjust_field_align_p(FIELD, COMPUTED) 0
>
> is what succeeds for me. false is not defined for ObjC. Checked in on the
> trunk
> and the branches.
Since we didn't backport the actual ABI change to the branches, only the
warning,
I think it would be
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 03:16:03PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> Blah, that won't work of course. The macro needs to take two
> >> parameters.
> >>
> >> #define rs6000_special_adjust_field_align_p(FIELD, COMPUTED) false
> >
> > This is pre-approved if it works. I really should finish off the
Am 27.07.2014 13:59, schrieb pins...@gmail.com:
>
>
>> On Jul 27, 2014, at 4:53 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:16:07PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> He
> On Jul 27, 2014, at 4:53 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:16:07PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
Hello,
this is the variant intended for the 4.8/
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:16:07PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/g
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> > Hello,
> >
> > this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01072.html
> >
> > As discussed, it does *not* ac
Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> Hello,
>
> this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01072.html
>
> As discussed, it does *not* actually change ABI, but only warn when
> encountering a situation where the ABI
On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:53 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:40:31AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This patch is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
>
> Ok.
Ok, I committed this as revision 212899. Thanks!
Peter
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:01:21PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> This patch is okay with me if okay with the Release Managers.
Ok.
Jakub
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:13:09PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_function_arg): If a float argument
> > does not fit fully into floating-point registers, and there is still
> > space in the register parameter area, i
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:11:56PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_function_arg_boundary): Issue
> > -Wpsabi note when encountering a type where future GCC releases
> > will apply different alignment requirements.
> >
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00994.html
>
> As discussed, it does *not* actually change ABI, but only warn when
> encountering a situation wher
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00995.html
>
> As discussed, it does *not* actually change ABI, but only warn when
> encountering a situation wher
This patch is okay with me if okay with the Release Managers.
Thanks, David
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01072.html
>
> As discussed, it does
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:40:31AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> This patch is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
Ok.
Jakub
This patch is okay with me if it is okay with the Release Managers.
Thanks, David
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> With a recent mainline libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a
> lot of mainline ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
>
> ==2642
With a recent mainline libsanitizer merge from upstream, we're now seeing a
lot of mainline ASAN test suite failures with the following error:
==26426==ASan runtime does not come first in initial library list; you should
either link runtime to your application or manually preload it with LD_PREL
Hello,
this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01072.html
As discussed, it does *not* actually change ABI, but only warn when
encountering a situation where the ABI will change in a future GCC.
(Avoiding the specific term "
Hello,
this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00995.html
As discussed, it does *not* actually change ABI, but only warn when
encountering a situation where the ABI will change in a future GCC.
(Avoiding the specific term "
Hello,
this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg00994.html
As discussed, it does *not* actually change ABI, but only warn when
encountering a situation where the ABI will change in a future GCC.
(Avoiding the specific term "
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I missed a case in the vector API work for little endian. When VSX is
> enabled, the vec_mergeh and vec_mergel interfaces for 4x32 vectors are
> translated into xxmrghw and xxmrglw. The patterns for these were not
> adjusted for lit
Hi,
I missed a case in the vector API work for little endian. When VSX is
enabled, the vec_mergeh and vec_mergel interfaces for 4x32 vectors are
translated into xxmrghw and xxmrglw. The patterns for these were not
adjusted for little endian. This patch fixes this and adds tests for
V4SI and V4S
28 matches
Mail list logo
