On 10/8/21 4:49 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 8:32 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 9/21/21 7:3
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 8:32 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:38 PM H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 8:35 AM Martin Liška wrote:
> >
> > Hello.
> >
> > The patch is approved, are you planning committing the changes?
Committed.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Martin
>
> Hongtao is on holiday. He will be back later toda
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 8:35 AM Martin Liška wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> The patch is approved, are you planning committing the changes?
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
Hongtao is on holiday. He will be back later today.
--
H.J.
Hello.
The patch is approved, are you planning committing the changes?
Thanks,
Martin
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
> Hi:
> > Please don't add the -fno- option to the warning tests. As I said,
> > I would prefer to either suppress the vectorization for the failing
> > cases by tweaking the test code or xfail them. That way future
> > regressions won't be masked by the opti
Hi:
> Please don't add the -fno- option to the warning tests. As I said,
> I would prefer to either suppress the vectorization for the failing
> cases by tweaking the test code or xfail them. That way future
> regressions won't be masked by the option. Once we've moved
> the warning to a more su
On 9/23/21 9:32 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:18 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 9/23/21 12:30 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 9/2
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:18 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 9/23/21 12:30 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 9/21/21 7:
On 9/23/21 12:30 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
...
dif
On Thu, 23 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > >
> > > On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > diff --g
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 9:48 AM Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
> >
> > On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
> > ...
> > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
>
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:21 PM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
> ...
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
> >
On 9/22/21 8:21 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
...
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
index 1d79930cd58..9351f7e7a1a 100644
---
On 9/21/21 7:38 PM, Hongtao Liu wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
...
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-overflow-2.c
index 1d79930cd58..9351f7e7a1a 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/Wstringop-ov
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:13 AM Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 9/16/21 3:03 AM, Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ping
> >>> rebased on latest trunk.
> >>>
> >>> gc
On 9/16/21 3:03 AM, Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
Ping
rebased on latest trunk.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* common.opt (ftree-vectorize): Add Var(flag_tree_vectorize).
* doc/i
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 3:47 PM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 8:31 PM Richard Biener wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > > > w
On Fri, 17 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 8:31 PM Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
> > > >
> > >
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 8:31 PM Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ping
> > > > rebased on latest trunk.
> > > >
> > > > gc
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
> >
> > > Ping
> > > rebased on latest trunk.
> > >
> > > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > >
> > > * common.opt (ftree-vectorize): Add Var(flag_tr
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 4:23 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
>
> > Ping
> > rebased on latest trunk.
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * common.opt (ftree-vectorize): Add Var(flag_tree_vectorize).
> > * doc/invoke.texi (Options That Contro
On Thu, 16 Sep 2021, liuhongt wrote:
> Ping
> rebased on latest trunk.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * common.opt (ftree-vectorize): Add Var(flag_tree_vectorize).
> * doc/invoke.texi (Options That Control Optimization): Update
> documents.
> * opts.c (default_options_table): Ena
Ping
rebased on latest trunk.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* common.opt (ftree-vectorize): Add Var(flag_tree_vectorize).
* doc/invoke.texi (Options That Control Optimization): Update
documents.
* opts.c (default_options_table): Enable auto-vectorization at
O2 with very-c
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 12:37 AM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2021, liuhongt via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > Hi:
> > As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> > auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
> > vectorization for GCC trunk,
On Mon, 6 Sep 2021, liuhongt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi:
> As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
> vectorization for GCC trunk, so it would leave enough time to expose
> related issues and fix t
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 2:30 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 02:18:59PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 1:15 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 07:15:41PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > > > So what about finish_options then?
> >
On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 02:18:59PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 1:15 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 07:15:41PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > > So what about finish_options then?
> > > > default_options_optimization has only a single caller that t
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 1:15 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 07:15:41PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > So what about finish_options then?
> > > default_options_optimization has only a single caller that then calls
> > > read_cmdline_options and then finish_options.
> > in finis
On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 07:15:41PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > So what about finish_options then?
> > default_options_optimization has only a single caller that then calls
> > read_cmdline_options and then finish_options.
> in finish_options
> (gdb) p opts_set->x_flag_tree_loop_vectorize
> $37 =
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 7:01 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 06:58:37PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > > process_options would mean it affects only the command line and not
> > > __attribute__((optimize ("O2", "ftree-vectorize")))
> > > etc.
> > > So, shouldn't it be instead done
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 11:41 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 11:18:47AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi:
> > > As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> > > auto-vecto
On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 06:58:37PM +0800, Hongtao Liu wrote:
> > process_options would mean it affects only the command line and not
> > __attribute__((optimize ("O2", "ftree-vectorize")))
> > etc.
> > So, shouldn't it be instead done in default_options_optimization, somewhere
> It seems default_op
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 5:42 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 11:18:47AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi:
> > > As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
>
On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 11:18:47AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi:
> > As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> > auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
> > vec
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 5:19 PM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi:
> > As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> > auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi:
> As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
> vectorization for GCC trunk, so it would leave enough time to expose
> related is
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 4:46 PM liuhongt via Gcc-patches
wrote:
>
> Hi:
> As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
> auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
> vectorization for GCC trunk, so it would leave enough time to expose
> related iss
Hi:
As discussed in [1], most of (currently unopposed) targets want
auto-vectorization at O2, and IMHO now would be a good time to enable O2
vectorization for GCC trunk, so it would leave enough time to expose
related issues and fix them.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu{-m32,}
39 matches
Mail list logo
