On 06/13/2017 03:49 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 06/09/2017 03:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> You can directly transform to no_sanitize with integer mask, not sure why
>>> you'd need an intermediate step with a string?
>>
>> Hello.
>>
>>
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 03:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> You can directly transform to no_sanitize with integer mask, not sure why
>> you'd need an intermediate step with a string?
>
> Hello.
>
> Done in attached patch, I'm sending both incremental an
On 06/09/2017 03:35 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> You can directly transform to no_sanitize with integer mask, not sure why
> you'd need an intermediate step with a string?
Hello.
Done in attached patch, I'm sending both incremental and final version
(complete patch).
I also decided to support no_
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 02:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/09/2017 01:05 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>
On 06/09/2017 02:27 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/09/2017 01:05 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/09/2017 12:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Martin Lišk
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 01:05 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/09/2017 12:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>
>>>
On 06/09/2017 11:42 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 11:29:06AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
Having that inlined would be great, however we'll need to put it to tree.h
and thus we have to include "options.h" before tree.h in multiple source files.
Doesn't that mean that tree.h is
On 06/09/2017 01:05 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/09/2017 12:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/09/2017 12:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martin Liš
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 12:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/09/2017 12:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>
>
>>
On 06/09/2017 12:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/09/2017 12:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/08/2017 03:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd still prefer to handle it with the
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 06/09/2017 12:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/08/2017 03:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd still prefer to handle it with the flags infrastruc
On 06/09/2017 12:12 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 06/08/2017 03:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd still prefer to handle it with the flags infrastructure instead, but
if
Richard wants to do it this way, then at least:
On Thu, Jun 08, 201
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 06/08/2017 03:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I'd still prefer to handle it with the flags infrastructure instead, but
>> if
>> Richard wants to do it this way, then at least:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 03:30:49PM +0200, Mart
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 11:29:06AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> Having that inlined would be great, however we'll need to put it to tree.h
> and thus we have to include "options.h" before tree.h in multiple source
> files.
Doesn't that mean that tree.h is not the right header to put this into?
It
On 06/08/2017 03:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd still prefer to handle it with the flags infrastructure instead, but if
Richard wants to do it this way, then at least:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 03:30:49PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
+/* Return true when flag_sanitize & FLAG is non-zero. If
Hi!
I'd still prefer to handle it with the flags infrastructure instead, but if
Richard wants to do it this way, then at least:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 03:30:49PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> +/* Return true when flag_sanitize & FLAG is non-zero. If FN is non-null,
> + remove all flags mention
On 06/02/2017 12:40 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 05/31/2017 03:31 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 05/31/2017 02:04 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:51 PM,
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 03:31 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 05/31/2017 02:04 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at
On 31 May 2017 14:25:09 CEST, "Martin Liška" wrote:
>I've got written that on my TODO list. Will work on that some time in
>the stage1.
BTW.. May I ask you to put it below https://gcc.gnu.org/PR65534 (the tailcall
resp. IPA-ICF thing :-)
Many TIA and cheers,
On 05/31/2017 03:31 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 05/31/2017 02:04 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Just wanting t
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 02:04 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to implement
On 05/31/2017 02:04 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to implement
>>> what are really
>>> function attributes doesn't look v
On 05/31/2017 02:06 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:57:48PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 05/31/2017 01:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Just wa
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:57:48PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 05/31/2017 01:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to implement
>> what are really
>> function attributes doesn't look very clean. Unless the plan is to get rid
>> of
>>
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:57:48PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 01:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to implement
> >> what are really
> >> function attributes does
On 05/31/2017 01:51 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to implement
>> what are really
>> function attributes doesn't look very clean. Unless the plan is to get rid
>> of
>> function a
On 05/31/2017 01:46 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:24:47PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 05/31/2017 10:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:04:53AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> diff --gi
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:46:00PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Just wanting to add that "ab-"using options/variables to implement
> what are really
> function attributes doesn't look very clean. Unless the plan is to get rid of
> function attributes in favor of per-function options.
Function a
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:24:47PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 05/31/2017 10:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:04:53AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> >> diff --git a/gcc/common.opt b/gcc/common.opt
>> >> index 13
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:24:47PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 10:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:04:53AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> >> diff --git a/gcc/common.opt b/gcc/common.opt
> >> index 13305558d2d..5e9942d5100 100644
> >> --- a/gcc/common.opt
> >>
On 05/31/2017 10:31 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Martin Liška wrote:
>> I added to common.opt:
>> Common RejectNegative Joined UInteger Var(flag_no_sanitize_fn) PerFunction
>> No sanitize flags for a function
>
> This needs a period at the end ("for a function.").
Ah, I see
On 05/31/2017 10:35 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:04:53AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
>> diff --git a/gcc/common.opt b/gcc/common.opt
>> index 13305558d2d..5e9942d5100 100644
>> --- a/gcc/common.opt
>> +++ b/gcc/common.opt
>> @@ -222,9 +222,13 @@ bool flag_opts_finished
>> V
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:04:53AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/common.opt b/gcc/common.opt
> index 13305558d2d..5e9942d5100 100644
> --- a/gcc/common.opt
> +++ b/gcc/common.opt
> @@ -222,9 +222,13 @@ bool flag_opts_finished
> Variable
> unsigned int flag_sanitize
>
> +###
> +C
On Wed, 31 May 2017, Martin Liška wrote:
> I added to common.opt:
> Common RejectNegative Joined UInteger Var(flag_no_sanitize_fn) PerFunction
> No sanitize flags for a function
This needs a period at the end ("for a function.").
> FAIL: compiler driver --help=optimizers option(s): "^ +-.*[^:.]$"
35 matches
Mail list logo
