On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 03:05:59PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 02:56:58PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > --- gcc/Makefile.in.mp 2013-08-29 14:24:49.839578625 +0200
> > +++ gcc/Makefile.in 2013-08-29 14:54:39.354258737 +0200
> > @@ -2273,7 +2273,7 @@ tsan.o : $(CONFIG
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 02:56:58PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> --- gcc/Makefile.in.mp2013-08-29 14:24:49.839578625 +0200
> +++ gcc/Makefile.in 2013-08-29 14:54:39.354258737 +0200
> @@ -2273,7 +2273,7 @@ tsan.o : $(CONFIG_H) $(SYSTEM_H) $(TREE_
> intl.h cfghooks.h output.h options.h
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:37:31PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:30:46PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > >From a quick look, it doesn't seem like we do. (I was searching for
> > something about pointer_map in ggc* and gen* files.)
>
> If we can't make it GC aware easily
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:30:46PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >From a quick look, it doesn't seem like we do. (I was searching for
> something about pointer_map in ggc* and gen* files.)
If we can't make it GC aware easily, I'm afraid we need to revert that change to
pointer_map. Now, the ques
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 03:05:37PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:57:01PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:49:54PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:40:50PM
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:57:01PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:49:54PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:40:50PM +0200, Ric
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:57:01PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:49:54PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:40:50PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:33 PM, M
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 02:49:54PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:40:50PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >> > It turned out that for tree -> tree mapping
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:40:50PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>> > It turned out that for tree -> tree mapping we don't need the hash
>> > table at all; pointer map is much more conv
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 12:40:50PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > It turned out that for tree -> tree mapping we don't need the hash
> > table at all; pointer map is much more convenient. So this patch
> > weeds out the hash table out of u
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> It turned out that for tree -> tree mapping we don't need the hash
> table at all; pointer map is much more convenient. So this patch
> weeds out the hash table out of ubsan and introduces pointer map
> instead. Quite a lot of code could go
11 matches
Mail list logo
