Re: PING^2: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-10-20 Thread Jan Hubicka
> >> > >> This patch avoids calling varpool_node::finalize_decl on error_mark_node > >> type decls. Does it make sense? Yep, i guess this is fine. I wonder why error_mark_node needs to be in local decl list? :) honza > >> > >> > >> H.J. > >> -- > >> gcc/ > >> > >> PR target/66810 > >>

Re: PING^2: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-10-19 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 10/20/2015 12:07 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:57:31PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: I don't see why the C FE would need to invoke finish_decl twice here. [...] So I'd rather have the C frontend not invoke rest_of_decl_compilation on this in the first place. Your patch still

PING^2: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-10-19 Thread H.J. Lu
PING On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:13 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > PING > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 5:19 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:57:31PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener >>> > wrote

PING: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-09-30 Thread H.J. Lu
PING On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 5:19 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:57:31PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener >> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >>>

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-10 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 2:19 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:57:31PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener >> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >>> On Thu

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-10 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:57:31PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 4:06 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener >>> wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 20

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On We

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:08 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > There is no

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> > There is no need to try different alignment on variable of >>> > err

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:52 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > There is no need to try different alignment on variable of >> > error_mark_node. >> > >> > OK for trunk if there is no regressio

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:16:38AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > There is no need to try different alignment on variable of > > error_mark_node. > > > > OK for trunk if there is no regression? > > Can't we avoid calling align_variable on error_m

Re: [PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-09 Thread Richard Biener
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:32 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > There is no need to try different alignment on variable of > error_mark_node. > > OK for trunk if there is no regression? Can't we avoid calling align_variable on error_mark_node type decls completely? That is, punt earlier when we try to emit it.

[PATCH] Limit alignment on error_mark_node variable

2015-07-08 Thread H.J. Lu
There is no need to try different alignment on variable of error_mark_node. OK for trunk if there is no regression? Thanks. H.J. -- gcc/ PR target/66810 * varasm.c (align_variable): Don't try different alignment on variable of error_mark_node. gcc/testsuite/ PR