> Then I think we can put all bits together now:
>
> 1. Let Sandra apply her Bit-fields patch "reimplement
> -fstrict-volatile-bitfields v4, part 1/2" which was
> posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg02058.html
> and approved here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:18:23, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
>>
Hi,
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:18:23, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernd Edlinger
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
>>> wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Bie
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>>
On Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:51:15, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>>> wrote:
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to so
Richard,
> Note I just want to help as well and I am not very familiar with
> the details of the implementation here. So I'd rather have
> a patch "obviously correct" to me - which expanding a condition
> by several more checks isn't ;)
>
Thanks a lot, I understand that very well. Any help is wel
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
>>> ignoring the
>>
>
> Hmm, same patch as last time attached?
>
> Richard.
>
Yes, only the change-log had one redundant line.
Bernd.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
>>> ignoring the
>>
Hi,
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 15:10:51, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
> wrote:
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
>> ignoring the
>> memory mode. I hope you are gonna like it.
>>
>> This time I even a
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
> ignoring the
> memory mode. I hope you are gonna like it.
>
> This time I even added a comment :-)
Ehm, ...
+ /* If MODE has no size i.e. BLKm
Hi Richard,
I had just an idea how to solve that recursion problem without completely
ignoring the
memory mode. I hope you are gonna like it.
This time I even added a comment :-)
Ok for trunk after boot-strap and regression-testing?
Bernd.
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:23:11, Richard Biener wrote:
>
On Tue, 3 Dec 2013 12:23:11, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bernd Edlinger
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is my proposal for ulimately getting rid of the nasty
>> store_fixed_bit_field recursion.
>>
>> IMHO, the root of the recursion trouble is here:
>>
>> @@ -1007,12 +101
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is my proposal for ulimately getting rid of the nasty
> store_fixed_bit_field recursion.
>
> IMHO, the root of the recursion trouble is here:
>
> @@ -1007,12 +1013,8 @@ store_fixed_bit_field (rtx op0, unsigned
>
>if (MEM_P
Hi,
This is my proposal for ulimately getting rid of the nasty
store_fixed_bit_field recursion.
IMHO, the root of the recursion trouble is here:
@@ -1007,12 +1013,8 @@ store_fixed_bit_field (rtx op0, unsigned
if (MEM_P (op0))
{
mode = GET_MODE (op0);
if (GET_MODE_BITSIZE (m
15 matches
Mail list logo
