> I'm not sure what that means, whether a wrong version of
> autoconf/automake was used (though when I accidentally tried that, it
> has always complained loudly) or if some environment difference can
> cause this. Perhaps I should change the script not to care about
> commits though that won't ha
Hello,
On Thu, Oct 12 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:
>
[...]
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> PR bootstrap/84402
> PR target/111600
>
> * Makefile.in: Handle split insn-emit.cc.
> * configure: Regenerate.
> * configure.ac: Add --with-insnemit-partitions.
> * genemit.cc (output_pee
On 10/27/23 13:04, Robin Dapp wrote:
After working with Sam off-list (thanks) I managed to get hppa to
build. Initially it looked as if hppa just had a very small number of
instruction patterns so we wouldn't generate all 10 output files.
However, the actual issue (which we will only hit with
After working with Sam off-list (thanks) I managed to get hppa to
build. Initially it looked as if hppa just had a very small number of
instruction patterns so we wouldn't generate all 10 output files.
However, the actual issue (which we will only hit with a low
pattern count) was with counting al
On 10/17/23 01:04, Robin Dapp wrote:
Natively, things seem fine, but for cross, I get failures on a few
targets (hppa2.0-unknown-linux-gnu, hppa64-unknown-linux-gnu).
With ./configure --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
--target=hppa2.0-unknown-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu && make
-j$(nproc),
> Natively, things seem fine, but for cross, I get failures on a few
> targets (hppa2.0-unknown-linux-gnu, hppa64-unknown-linux-gnu).
>
> With ./configure --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> --target=hppa2.0-unknown-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu && make
> -j$(nproc), I get a bunch of stuff like:
Robin Dapp writes:
> Hi,
>
> the attached v2 includes Tamar's suggestion of keeping the current
> stdout behavior. When no output files are passed (via -O) the output
> is written to stdout as before.
>
> Tamar also mentioned off-list that, similar to match.pd, it might make
> sense to balance
Robin Dapp writes:
> Hi,
>
> the attached v2 includes Tamar's suggestion of keeping the current
> stdout behavior. When no output files are passed (via -O) the output
> is written to stdout as before.
>
> Tamar also mentioned off-list that, similar to match.pd, it might make
> sense to balance
Hi,
the attached v2 includes Tamar's suggestion of keeping the current
stdout behavior. When no output files are passed (via -O) the output
is written to stdout as before.
Tamar also mentioned off-list that, similar to match.pd, it might make
sense to balance the partitions in a better way than
> Hmm why? The same callback you use to consume the listed arguments
> can be used to consume the list can it not? I may be wrong, but from
> what I remember the callback is called when main can't consume an
> argv value and it's allowed to eat all remaining input?
Ah, I see. If that's possible
> -Original Message-
> From: Robin Dapp
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2023 4:15 PM
> To: gcc-patches
> Cc: rdapp@gmail.com; jeffreyalaw ; Tamar
> Christina ; rjie...@linux.alibaba.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] genemit: Split insn-emit.cc into ten files.
>
>
> Testsuite is unchanged on all but x86 where, strangely, I saw several
> illegal instructions in the pch tests. Those were not reproducible
> in a second manual test suite run. I'm just running another full
> bootstrap and testsuite cycle with the latest trunk.
Follow-up on the pch tests. The
Hi,
Thanks for doing this!
I'll leave the review to Richard, but I think you should adopt the same approach
taken by the match.pd split, in that you provide the list of files as an
argument
to the genemit instead of the number of files. And if no list is provided it
outputs to stdout as it does
13 matches
Mail list logo
