On Mär 29 2017, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> But I still see some ICEs while running the testsuite,
>> which I haven't investigated yet. And the original comment before this
>> hunk doesn't make sense at this point.
>
> The hunk in the 'else' arm of the big surrounding conditional?
Yes. It talks ab
> Thanks, this gets me further, the ada library now compiles with
> -mabi=ilp32.
Great, I think that you can apply it as obvious then, it's code which is only
exercised in Ada and on ILP32 64-bit platforms so the risk is very low...
> But I still see some ICEs while running the testsuite,
> whic
On Mär 28 2017, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> That needs to use ptr_mode, not Pmode.
>
> I don't think so, the whole computation is in Pmode. Could you try something
> similar to what is done in the 'else' arm of the big surrounding conditional?
Thanks, this gets me further, the ada library now comp
> That needs to use ptr_mode, not Pmode.
I don't think so, the whole computation is in Pmode. Could you try something
similar to what is done in the 'else' arm of the big surrounding conditional?
--
Eric Botcazou
On Sep 04 2016, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> Index: calls.c
> ===
> --- calls.c (revision 239944)
> +++ calls.c (working copy)
> @@ -183,17 +183,76 @@ static void restore_fixed_argument_area (rtx, rtx,
>
> rtx
> prepare_call_addres
> Yes I rebuilt everything and now it all looks good. The previously
> failing testcases are now passing and no new regressions. I must have had
> something set incorrectly in my environment on my first try.
Thanks for confirming.
--
Eric Botcazou
Yes I rebuilt everything and now it all looks good. The previously
failing testcases
are now passing and no new regressions. I must have had something set
incorrectly
in my environment on my first try.
Thanks!
On 12/06/2016 04:26 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
I tried this patch applied agains
> > Btw, Ian, if the heap trampoline support is no longer used by the Go
> > compiler, you might want to remove it from the middle-end.
>
> Yes, I suppose so. The Go frontend hasn't used them for a while.
Speaking of obsolete stuff, do you have any opinion on the below patch?
https://gcc.gnu.o
> I tried this patch applied against latest and it fixed the testcases
> that I had reported as failing, but the patch also causes
>
> libgo reflect testcase to fail. Still testing to verify and will report
> the failure details.
Please double check, as I can reproduce neither on PowerPC64 nor o
I tried this patch applied against latest and it fixed the testcases
that I had reported as failing, but the patch also causes
libgo reflect testcase to fail. Still testing to verify and will report
the failure details.
On 12/06/2016 02:18 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> There are a couple of changes to the RTL expander for calls; they are
>> supposed to be transparent but they might have tripped on a latent issue.
>
> Tentative fix attached, I need to test it extensively in Ada though.
Thanks. Lynn, can yo
> There are a couple of changes to the RTL expander for calls; they are
> supposed to be transparent but they might have tripped on a latent issue.
Tentative fix attached, I need to test it extensively in Ada though.
Btw, Ian, if the heap trampoline support is no longer used by the Go compiler,
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Lynn A. Boger
wrote:
> I think you mean https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18200.
Yes, thanks, I meant to write https://golang.org/issue/18200.
Ian
> On 12/05/2016 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou
>> wrote:
>
> According to https://golang.org/cl/18200, this change broke Go on PPC64le.
Any other platform where this also happened?
> I haven't investigated myself and I don't know why. Go does not use
> stack trampolines for function closures. It does use function
> closures, but they are built on the h
I think you mean https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18200.
- Lynn
On 12/05/2016 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
PR ada/37139
PR ada/67205
* common.opt (-ftrampolines): New option.
On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> 2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
>
> PR ada/37139
> PR ada/67205
> * common.opt (-ftrampolines): New option.
> * doc/invoke.texi (Code Gen Options): Document it.
> * doc/tm.texi.in (Trampolines): AddTARGET_
On 09/04/2016 02:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
This is the common infrastructure part. As explained in the initial message,
nothing is activated unless both the language and the target opt in.
2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
PR ada/37139
PR ada/67205
* common.opt (-ftrampoli
On 09/04/2016 02:10 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
This is the common infrastructure part. As explained in the initial message,
nothing is activated unless both the language and the target opt in.
2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
PR ada/37139
PR ada/67205
* common.opt (-ftrampoli
This is the common infrastructure part. As explained in the initial message,
nothing is activated unless both the language and the target opt in.
2016-07-04 Eric Botcazou
PR ada/37139
PR ada/67205
* common.opt (-ftrampolines): New option.
* doc/invoke.texi (C
19 matches
Mail list logo
