Hi,
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 08:43:46, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On June 26, 2014 12:03:21 AM CEST, Martin Jambor wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:14:31PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 06/24/14 14:19, Martin Jambor wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:35:01PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On June 26, 2014 12:03:21 AM CEST, Martin Jambor wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:14:31PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 06/24/14 14:19, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> >On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:35:01PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> >>Hi Martin,
>> >>
>>
>> Well actually, I am not sure
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:14:31PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 06/24/14 14:19, Martin Jambor wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:35:01PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> >>Hi Martin,
> >>
>
> Well actually, I am not sure if we ever wanted to have a race condition
> here.
> Hav
On 06/24/14 14:19, Martin Jambor wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:35:01PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
Hi Martin,
Well actually, I am not sure if we ever wanted to have a race condition here.
Have you seen any impact of --param allow-store-data-races on any benchmark?
It's trivially to wri
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:14:17AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
Perhaps not unsurprisingly, the patch is very similar. Bootstrapped
and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk?
Ok - please give
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:14:17AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > Perhaps not unsurprisingly, the patch is very similar. Bootstrapped
>> > and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk?
>>
>> Ok - please give the C++/atomics folks a chance t
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:14:17AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Perhaps not unsurprisingly, the patch is very similar. Bootstrapped
> > and tested on x86_64-linux. OK for trunk?
>
> Ok - please give the C++/atomics folks a chance to comment.
>
> This change of default behavior should also b
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:35:01PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> >>
>> >> Well actually, I am not sure if we ever wanted to have a race condition
>> >> here.
>> >> Have you seen any impact of --param allow-store-data-race
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 03:35:01PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> >>
> >> Well actually, I am not sure if we ever wanted to have a race condition
> >> here.
> >> Have you seen any impact of --param allow-store-data-races on any
> >> benchmark?
> >
> > It's trivially to write one.
Hi Martin,
>>
>> Well actually, I am not sure if we ever wanted to have a race condition here.
>> Have you seen any impact of --param allow-store-data-races on any benchmark?
>
> It's trivially to write one. The only pass that checks the param is
> tree loop invariant motion and it does that when
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 13:44:18, Martin Jambor wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 06:18:47PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> from a recent discussion on g...@gcc.gnu.org I have learned that the
>>> default o
Hi,
On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 13:44:18, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 06:18:47PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> from a recent discussion on g...@gcc.gnu.org I have learned that the default
>> of
>> --param allow-store-data-races is still 1, and it is causing probl
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 06:18:47PM +0200, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> from a recent discussion on g...@gcc.gnu.org I have learned that the default
> of
> --param allow-store-data-races is still 1, and it is causing problems.
> Therefore I would like to suggest to change the default of th
13 matches
Mail list logo
