Re: [PING][PATCH 0/1] aarch64: testsuite: Keep -mtune=generic when specifying -moverride

Gentle ping. On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 09:43:29PM +, Spencer Abson wrote: > Hi all, > > Currently, using '-moverride' in the testsuite will reset the baseline tuning > model from 'generic' to the default tuning for the architecture level. Since > 'generic' is the tuning model relied upon by mo

Re: [PING][PATCH] config/rs6000/t-float128: Don't encode full build paths into headers

Hi! On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 12:10:16PM +, Sadineni, Harish wrote: > Ping for [1]https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-August/599882.html. > > This patch avoids embedding full build paths into generated headers by using > only the basename of the source file. This helps to improve bui

Re: [PING][PATCH v3] match.pd: Fold (x + y) >> 1 into IFN_AVG_FLOOR (x, y) for vectors

On Thu, 22 May 2025, Pengfei Li wrote: > Hi, > > Just a gentle ping for below patch v3. > > I’ve made minor changes from v2 to v3, as listed below: > - Added check if IFN_AVG_FLOOR is supported. > - Wrapped new code in match.pd with macro "#ifdef GIMPLE". OK. Thanks, Richard. > > This patch f

Re: [PING] [PATCH] vect: Improve vectorization for small-trip-count loops using subvectors

On 6/2/25 2:23 AM, Pengfei Li wrote: Hi all, I would like to bring attention back to this patch: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20250508164950.5646-1-pengfei@arm.com/ The patch improves auto-vectorization for loops with known small trip counts by introducing a new target ho

Re: [PING][PATCH][GCC15] Alpha: Fix base block alignment calculation regression

On Thu, 15 May 2025, Jeff Law wrote: > > > Address this issue by recursing into COMPONENT_REF tree nodes until the > > > outermost one has been reached, which is supposed to be a MEM_REF one, > > > accumulating the offset as we go, fixing a commit e0dae4da4c45 ("Alpha: > > > Also use tree informat

Re: [PING][PATCH][GCC15] Alpha: Fix base block alignment calculation regression

On 5/12/25 11:21 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: On Tue, 25 Feb 2025, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: Address this issue by recursing into COMPONENT_REF tree nodes until the outermost one has been reached, which is supposed to be a MEM_REF one, accumulating the offset as we go, fixing a commit e0dae4d

Re:[ping] [PATCH v2] MIPS: Fix the issue with the '-fpatchable-function-entry=' feature.

Ping? 在 2025/5/9 上午10:14, Lulu Cheng 写道: From: ChengLulu PR target/99217 gcc/ChangeLog: * config/mips/mips.cc (mips_start_function_definition): Implements the functionality of '-fpatchable-function-entry='. (mips_print_patchable_function_entry): Define empty f

Re: [PING] [PATCH] Fortran: fix passing of inquiry ref of complex array to TRANSFER [PR102891]

Hi Jerry! Am 10.05.25 um 21:53 schrieb Jerry D: On 5/10/25 11:33 AM, Harald Anlauf wrote: Early ping. Am 06.05.25 um 21:06 schrieb Harald Anlauf: Dear all, here's another rather obvious case where a temporary is needed for an inquiry reference of a complex array which is a component of a der

Re: [PING] [PATCH] Fortran: fix passing of inquiry ref of complex array to TRANSFER [PR102891]

On 5/10/25 11:33 AM, Harald Anlauf wrote: Early ping. Am 06.05.25 um 21:06 schrieb Harald Anlauf: Dear all, here's another rather obvious case where a temporary is needed for an inquiry reference of a complex array which is a component of a derived type.  In contrast to PR119986, the argument

Re: PING: [PATCH] Add TARGET_STORE_BY_PIECES_ICODE

On Thu, 8 May 2025, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 8:57 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On x86, both stores with 32-bit immediate and register are supported: > > > >0: 48 c7 40 10 00 00 00 00 movq $0x0,0x10(%rax) > >8: 48 89 50 10 movq %rdx,0x10(%rax) > > > > But store wi

Re: PING: [PATCH] x86: Add a pass to remove redundant all 0s/1s vector load

On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 10:01 AM Hongtao Liu wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 4:30 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 1:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 7:50 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > >

Re: PING: [PATCH] x86: Add a pass to remove redundant all 0s/1s vector load

On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 4:30 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 1:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 7:50 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > > > For all different modes of all 0s/1s vectors, we can use the si

Re: PING: [PATCH] x86: Add a pass to remove redundant all 0s/1s vector load

On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 11:29 AM Hongtao Liu wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 1:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 7:50 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > For all different modes of all 0s/1s vectors, we can use the single widest > > > all 0s/1s vector register for all 0s/1s vector

Re: PING: [PATCH] x86: Add a pass to remove redundant all 0s/1s vector load

On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 1:25 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 7:50 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > For all different modes of all 0s/1s vectors, we can use the single widest > > all 0s/1s vector register for all 0s/1s vector uses in the whole function. > > Add a pass to generate a single wi

Re: PING: [PATCH v2] x86: Add pcmpeq splitters

On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 4:16 PM Uros Bizjak wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 7:22 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 6:27 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > Add pcmpeq splitters to split > > > > > > (insn 5 3 7 2 (set (reg:V4SI 100) > > > (eq:V4SI (reg:V4SI 98) > > >

Re: PING: [PATCH v2] x86: Add pcmpeq splitters

On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 7:22 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 6:27 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > Add pcmpeq splitters to split > > > > (insn 5 3 7 2 (set (reg:V4SI 100) > > (eq:V4SI (reg:V4SI 98) > > (reg:V4SI 98))) 7910 {*sse2_eqv4si3} > > (expr_list:REG_DEAD (re

Re: [PING][PATCH] doc: Clarify REG_EH_REGION note usage

Applied to trunk, thank you! --Philipp. On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 at 21:51, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On 4/8/25 6:12 AM, Konstantinos Eleftheriou wrote: > > Hi, > > Just a ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025- > > March/677635.html >

Re: [PING][PATCH] doc: Clarify REG_EH_REGION note usage

On 4/8/25 6:12 AM, Konstantinos Eleftheriou wrote: Hi, Just a ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025- March/677635.html . OK for the trunk. I don't think it's worth porting to the release branches. jeff

RE: [ping][PATCH] libgcobol: Provide fallbacks for C32 strfromf32/64 [PR119296].

Since you say it tests okay, I say it's "Okay for trunk". I am new to this, as you know, and I am still trying to figure out how to make all of this work. Nor have Jim and I figured out how to handle our joint responsibility. Hence delays. > -Original Message- > From: Iain Sandoe > Se

RE: [ping][PATCH] libgcobol: Provide fallbacks for C32 strfromf32/64 [PR119296].

> -Original Message- > From: Iain Sandoe > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2025 15:05 > To: Robert Dubner > Cc: GCC Patches ; James K. Lowden > > Subject: Re: [ping][PATCH] libgcobol: Provide fallbacks for C32 > strfromf32/64 [PR119296]. > > > > > On 2 A

Re: [ping][PATCH] libgcobol: Provide fallbacks for C32 strfromf32/64 [PR119296].

> On 2 Apr 2025, at 20:02, Robert Dubner wrote: > > Since you say it tests okay, I say it's "Okay for trunk". thanks. > > I am new to this, as you know, and I am still trying to figure out how to > make all of this work. Nor have Jim and I figured out how to handle our > joint responsibilit

Re: [PING][PATCH v3 0/4] Fix data races with sub-longword accesses on Alpha

On Sat, 22 Mar 2025, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > This is v3 of the series comprising the final 4 outstanding changes. I > > note that the corresponding v2 patches have been approved, but concerns > > were discussed, which this update has addressed. > > Ping for: >

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

PING! On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 10:54:30 +0100 Andre Vehreschild wrote: > Hi all, > > attached patch makes an attempt to announce the ABI-changes in the coarrays > library. Me being German always has difficulties to find a proper wording. So > please propose improvements. > > Stupid question: How to I

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

On 3/10/25 9:57 AM, Jerry D wrote: On 3/10/25 1:08 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote: Hi Steve and Jerry, thanks for the review and the proposed changes. I have based on them, but needed to adapt some places, because the meaning was changed. Can you please take another look? Jerry, where do I find

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

On 3/10/25 1:08 AM, Andre Vehreschild wrote: Hi Steve and Jerry, thanks for the review and the proposed changes. I have based on them, but needed to adapt some places, because the meaning was changed. Can you please take another look? Jerry, where do I find this check-script? In bin/ nothing ju

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

Hi Jerry, thanks for the review. Committed as 87c7db8b1b2c1484d6de3331098669735d33f95e. I also had it checked using the W3C validator w/o any errors. Therefore committed. Thanks again, Andre On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 10:01:46 -0700 Jerry D wrote: > On 3/10/25 9:57 AM, Jerry D wrote: > > On

Re: Ping: [PATCH] LoongArch: combine related slli operations

在 2025/3/10 下午3:24, Zhou Zhao 写道: Ping Hi, You need to send another patch for version V2 with modifications. However, I am currently testing the value of align, and GCC15 is already in stage 4, so this patch might have to wait until the GCC16 stage 1 phase before it can be integrated.

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

Hi Steve and Jerry, thanks for the review and the proposed changes. I have based on them, but needed to adapt some places, because the meaning was changed. Can you please take another look? Jerry, where do I find this check-script? In bin/ nothing jumps out at me to be a check-script. Thanks,

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

On 3/6/25 10:02 AM, Steve Kargl wrote: Andre, Here's a bit of wordsmith. I removed the abbreviation "Esp." I'm not sure if there is additional markup needed; especially, with the "-fcoarray=single" I inserted. Coarray support has been reworked to allow access to components in derived typ

Re: [Ping, Patch, www-docs, Fortran, Coarray-ABI] Announce coarray-ABI changes in gfortran-15

Andre, Here's a bit of wordsmith. I removed the abbreviation "Esp." I'm not sure if there is additional markup needed; especially, with the "-fcoarray=single" I inserted. Coarray support has been reworked to allow access to components in derived types that have not been compiled with coarray

Re: Ping: [PATCH] testsuite: Fix up toplevel-asm-1.c for LoongArch

在 2025/2/19 下午3:27, Xi Ruoyao 写道: On Wed, 2025-02-05 at 08:57 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: Like RISC-V, on LoongArch we don't really support %cN for SYMBOL_REFs even with -fno-pic. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * c-c++-common/toplevel-asm-1.c: Use %cc3 %cc4 instead of %c3 %c4 on LoongA

Re: Ping: [PATCH] late-combine: Tighten register class check [PR108840]

On 2/17/25 4:33 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: Ping Feel through the cracks. We really should acknowledge that you know this code better than anyone and shouldn't need to wait on review. Anyway, LGTM. jeff

Re: [PING][PATCH v2] libcpp: Fix incorrect line numbers in large files [PR108900]

Hi, you may want to Cc Lewis Hyatt on such patches (adding him now), I didn't touch this area. Alexander On Mon, 17 Feb 2025, yash.shi...@windriver.com wrote: > From: Yash Shinde > > This patch addresses an issue in the C preprocessor where incorrect line > number information is generated wh

Re: [PING][PATCH v3] Add new warning Wmissing-designated-initializers [PR39589]

On 2/5/25 3:43 PM, Peter Frost wrote: Ping https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-January/672568.html We're in regression fixes only phase of our development cycle. This doesn't fix a regression, so it'll need to wait for the next development window to open before it gets further at

Re: [PING, PATCH] fortran: fix -MT/-MQ adding additional target [PR47485]

Committed as: commit e41a5a2a0832509fa1c0b7cab0c8001fadbd23d4 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) Author: Jerry DeLisle Date: Tue Feb 4 17:21:42 2025 -0800 Fortran: Fix PR 47485. The -MT and -MQ options should replace the default target in the generated dependency file

Re: [PING, PATCH] fortran: fix -MT/-MQ adding additional target [PR47485]

On 2/4/25 9:29 AM, Jerry D wrote: On 2/3/25 4:46 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: On 4/02/2025 01:42, Jerry D wrote: On 2/3/25 2:14 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: Hi all, Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/ fortran/2024-December/061467.html Best wishes, Vincent On 30/

Re: [PING, PATCH] fortran: fix -MT/-MQ adding additional target [PR47485]

On 2/3/25 4:46 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: On 4/02/2025 01:42, Jerry D wrote: On 2/3/25 2:14 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: Hi all, Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/ fortran/2024-December/061467.html Best wishes, Vincent On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrot

Re: [PING, PATCH] fortran: fix -MT/-MQ adding additional target [PR47485]

On 4/02/2025 01:42, Jerry D wrote: On 2/3/25 2:14 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: Hi all, Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/ fortran/2024-December/061467.html Best wishes, Vincent On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: The -MT and -MQ options should replace

Re: [PING, PATCH] fortran: fix -MT/-MQ adding additional target [PR47485]

On 2/3/25 2:14 PM, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: Hi all, Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/ fortran/2024-December/061467.html Best wishes, Vincent On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: The -MT and -MQ options should replace the default target in the generated dep

Re: [PING, PATCH] fortran: fix -MT/-MQ adding additional target [PR47485]

Hi all, Gentle ping for the patch below: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-December/061467.html Best wishes, Vincent On 30/12/2024 00:19, Vincent Vanlaer wrote: The -MT and -MQ options should replace the default target in the generated dependency file. deps_add_target needs to be ca

Re: [ping,patch,avr] Try to work around PR118012 / PR118360

Georg-Johann Lay writes: > Ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-January/673336.html > > Am 11.01.25 um 14:09 schrieb Georg-Johann Lay: >> The patch below is for trunk. >> Andrew Pinski says he has a patch to fix it, bit that won't >> materialize >> before v16. >> AVR: PR118012

Re: [PING] [PATCH] testsuite: Fix test failing with -fimplicit-constexpr [PR118277]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 08:10:31PM +, Simon Martin wrote: > Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with "make check-c++-all". > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * g++.dg/cpp1z/constexpr-asm-5.C: Pass -fno-implicit-constexpr. LGTM. Jakub

Re: [PING] [PATCH] testsuite: Fix test failing with -fimplicit-constexpr [PR118277]

Hi Jakub, On 20 Jan 2025, at 10:28, Simon Martin wrote: > Hi Jakub, > > On 20 Jan 2025, at 10:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 08:52:17AM +, Simon Martin wrote: >>> On 12 Jan 2025, at 12:10, Simon Martin wrote: >>> While testing an unrelated C++ patch with "make chec

Re: [PING] [PATCH] testsuite: Fix test failing with -fimplicit-constexpr [PR118277]

Hi Jakub, On 20 Jan 2025, at 10:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 08:52:17AM +, Simon Martin wrote: >> On 12 Jan 2025, at 12:10, Simon Martin wrote: >> >>> While testing an unrelated C++ patch with "make check-c++-all", I >>> noticed that r15-6760-g38a13ea4117b96 added a test

Re: [PING] [PATCH] testsuite: Fix test failing with -fimplicit-constexpr [PR118277]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 08:52:17AM +, Simon Martin wrote: > On 12 Jan 2025, at 12:10, Simon Martin wrote: > > > While testing an unrelated C++ patch with "make check-c++-all", I > > noticed that r15-6760-g38a13ea4117b96 added a test case that fails > > with > > -fimplicit-constexpr. > > > > T

Re: Ping [PATCH v3 0/3] Match: support additional cases of unsigned scalar arithmetic

On 12/17/24 5:00 AM, Akram Ahmad wrote: Pinging While this was submitted before the stage1 deadline, it seems to have fallen through the cracks on the review side. It's unfortunate, but I'd tend to think it ought to be deferred at this point until the gcc-16 cycle. However, I won't objec

Re: Ping: [PATCH] d,ada/spec: only sub nostd{inc,lib} rather than nostd{inc,lib}*

Excerpts from Arsen Arsenović's message of Oktober 7, 2024 11:31 pm: > Ping on this patch. > Thanks, this is OK for D. Note, that the gdc driver does try to accomodate for mixing C++ and D code in the same application - so given: gdc a.d b.cc It adds -lstdc++ to the link command for conve

Re: [ping][PATCH] testsuite/118127: Pass fortran tests on ppc64le for IEEE128 long doubles

On 2025-01-06 11:34, Jakub Jelinek wrote: That looks incorrect to me. ppc_ieee128_ok just means that one can use the __ieee128 type (and only if -mfloat128 option is passed). What the tests care is whether real(16) is IEEE128 or IBM128. That is dependent on what glibc gcc has been configured agai

Re: [PING] [PATCH 1/6] Add tunables for input buffer

On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 07:47:27PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > On Wed, 2025-01-08 at 07:48 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > I wanted to ping this patch series. Thanks. > > > > -Andi > > > > Thanks for tha patches, and sorry about not getting back to you earlier > (I've been focusing on analyz

Re: [PING] [PATCH 1/6] Add tunables for input buffer

On Wed, 2025-01-08 at 07:48 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > > I wanted to ping this patch series. Thanks. > > -Andi > Thanks for tha patches, and sorry about not getting back to you earlier (I've been focusing on analyzing many 100s of build failures with GCC 15 relative to GCC 14) Overall, the pat

Re: [ping][PATCH] testsuite/118127: Pass fortran tests on ppc64le for IEEE128 long doubles

On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 11:01:18AM -0500, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > Ping! > > On 2024-12-19 08:16, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > Denormal behaviour is well defined for IEEE128 long doubles, so don't > > XFAIL some gfortran tests on ppc64le when configured with the IEEE128 > > long double ABI. >

Re: [PING][PATCH 00/15] Fix data races with sub-longword accesses on Alpha

On Sun, 15 Dec 2024, Jeff Law wrote: > > Ping for: > > > > > > > >

Re: [PING][PATCH 00/15] Fix data races with sub-longword accesses on Alpha

On Sat, 14 Dec 2024, Jeff Law wrote: > > Ping for: > > > > > > > > (this will presumably need tweak

Re: [PING] [PATCH, part4] Fortran: fix passing of NULL() to assumed-rank, derived type dummy [PR104819]

Hi Andre, Am 21.12.24 um 17:41 schrieb Andre Vehreschild: Hi Harald, the patch looks ok to me. thanks for taking a look! Pushed as r15-6408. Harald Thanks for the patch, Andre On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:00:05 +0100 Harald Anlauf wrote: Ping! Am 14.12.24 um 20:56 schrieb Harald A

Re: [PING] [PATCH, part4] Fortran: fix passing of NULL() to assumed-rank, derived type dummy [PR104819]

Hi Harald, the patch looks ok to me. Thanks for the patch, Andre On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:00:05 +0100 Harald Anlauf wrote: > Ping! > > Am 14.12.24 um 20:56 schrieb Harald Anlauf: > > Dear all, > > > > this patch is the 4th part of a series on the passing of NULL() to > > assumed-rank du

Re: [ping][patch] Allow target to chose address-space for artificial rodata lookup tables.

On 12/19/24 11:36 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: This is a ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-December/671216.html I'd prefer this to wait for gcc-16 as we're well into stage3. While using a hook makes it fairly safe, I think everyone is quite busy with stage3 activities.

Re: [PING][PATCH 00/15] Fix data races with sub-longword accesses on Alpha

On 12/3/24 2:02 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: On Mon, 18 Nov 2024, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: As it happens these data races also apply to BWX Alpha systems, as I have discovered in the course of this effort, although owing to how the Alpha backend of GCC has implemented block copy and clear

Re: [PING][PATCH 00/15] Fix data races with sub-longword accesses on Alpha

On 12/3/24 2:02 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: On Mon, 18 Nov 2024, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: As it happens these data races also apply to BWX Alpha systems, as I have discovered in the course of this effort, although owing to how the Alpha backend of GCC has implemented block copy and clear

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 11:55 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 4:09 PM Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 7:55 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/2/24 1:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:15 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > >> > >

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 4:09 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 7:55 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > > > > On 12/2/24 1:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:15 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > >>> On Thu,

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 7:55 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On 12/2/24 1:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:15 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu >>> > wrote: > >>>

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 2:55 AM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On 12/2/24 1:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:15 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu >>> > wrote: > >>>

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On 12/2/24 1:55 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:15 PM Jeff Law wrote: On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com>> wrote: Promote integer arguments smaller than int if TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES retur

Re: Ping: [PATCH] c++: Allow overloaded builtins to be used in SFINAE context

Ping 4 Also adding those that I've Cc'd in the patchset for FP atomics since this patch is enabling that one. From: Matthew Malcomson Sent: 26 November 2024 10:26 AM To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Jason Merrill ; Nathan Sidwell Subject: Re: Ping:

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:15 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu > > wrote: > > > > Promote integer arguments smaller than int if TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES > > returns true. > > > >

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 6:39 AM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 6:15 AM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > > > > On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu > > > wrote: > > > > > > Promote integer arguments smaller than int if

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 6:15 AM Jeff Law wrote: > > > > On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu > > wrote: > > > > Promote integer arguments smaller than int if TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES > > returns true. > > > >

Re: PING: [PATCH v4 1/7] Honor TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES during RTL expand

On 11/27/24 3:34 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: On Thu, Nov 21, 2024, 2:02 PM H.J. Lu > wrote: Promote integer arguments smaller than int if TARGET_PROMOTE_PROTOTYPES returns true.         PR middle-end/14907         * calls.c (initialize_argument_informatio

Re: Ping: [PATCH] c++: Allow overloaded builtins to be used in SFINAE context

Ping 3 On 11/18/24 13:22, Matthew Malcomson wrote: External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Ping 2 On 10/21/24 11:43, Matthew Malcomson wrote: External email: Use caution opening links or attachments Ping (re-sending ping because previous message body too large for list --

Re: Ping [PATCH] ada: PR target/117538 Traceback includes load address if executable is PIE.

> What I didn’t say before is that, if for example an exception is raised > in Ada Language Server and the code uses s-trasym to output a report, > what you get on macOS is, for example, > > ALS.MAIN] in GNATformat Format > [ALS.MAIN] raised CONSTRAINT_ERROR : erroneous memory access > _ALS.MAIN_

Re: *PING* [PATCH 0/7] fortran: Inline MINLOC/MAXLOC with DIM [PR90608]

Le 18/11/2024 à 20:18, Steve Kargl a écrit : Mikael, I've read through each of the patch and nothing jumped out as an issue. I think you can go ahead and commit them. I'll leave it up to you whether to commit a patch and wait a short time before committing the next in the series. The short t

Re: *PING* [PATCH 0/7] fortran: Inline MINLOC/MAXLOC with DIM [PR90608]

On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 01:01:39PM +0100, Mikael Morin wrote: > Le 30/10/2024 à 23:00, Harald Anlauf a écrit : > > > > given that Jakub changed lots of whitespace in r15-4624-g50332a4fdd3243, > > you may want to rebase your patches onto HEAD of trunk. > > > > May I also suggest to attach the patc

Re: [Ping][PATCH v2 00/12] AArch64/OpenMP: Test SVE ACLE types with various OpenMP constructs.

Ping. Thanks, Tejas. On 10/18/24 11:59 AM, Tejas Belagod wrote: Hi Jakub, Just wanted to add that I'm sorry for the delay in respinning the patchset - I was caught up with another piece of work. Thanks for the reviews so far and thank you for your patience. Thanks, Tejas. On 10/18/24 11:5

Re: Ping: [PATCH] Always set SECTION_RELRO for or .data.rel.ro{,.local} [PR116887]

On Tue, 2024-10-29 at 07:49 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > > > On 10/29/24 7:10 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-10-11 at 02:54 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > > > At least two ports (hppa and loongarch) need to set SECTION_RELRO for > > > .data.rel.ro{,.local} in section_type_flags (PR52999 and PR11688

Re: *PING* [PATCH 0/7] fortran: Inline MINLOC/MAXLOC with DIM [PR90608]

Le 30/10/2024 à 23:00, Harald Anlauf a écrit : given that Jakub changed lots of whitespace in r15-4624-g50332a4fdd3243, you may want to rebase your patches onto HEAD of trunk. May I also suggest to attach the patches instead of mailing them inline? Hello, I checked with today's master, didn'

Re: *PING* [PATCH 0/7] fortran: Inline MINLOC/MAXLOC with DIM [PR90608]

Hi Mikael, Am 30.10.24 um 11:23 schrieb Mikael Morin: *PING* The first series of patches was pushed, the second (and last) one [1][2] is awaiting review. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-October/665360.html [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-October/061180.html

Re: Ping: [PATCH] Always set SECTION_RELRO for or .data.rel.ro{,.local} [PR116887]

On 10/29/24 7:10 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote: On Fri, 2024-10-11 at 02:54 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: At least two ports (hppa and loongarch) need to set SECTION_RELRO for .data.rel.ro{,.local} in section_type_flags (PR52999 and PR116887), and I cannot see a reason not to just set it in the generic code.

Re: PING - [PATCH][LRA][PR116550] Reuse scratch registers generated by LRA

Just a reminder with CCing maintainer (Vladimir Makarov). Denis.

Re: ping: [PATCH] libcpp: Support extended characters for #pragma {push,pop}_macro [PR109704]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 08:52:45PM +, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 25 Sep 2024, Lewis Hyatt wrote: > > > Hello- > > > > May I please ping this one? Is there something maybe sub-optimal about > > how I organized it? I can adjust or break it into two maybe if that's > > helpful. Or else, if it

Re: ping: [PATCH] libcpp: Support extended characters for #pragma {push,pop}_macro [PR109704]

On Wed, 25 Sep 2024, Lewis Hyatt wrote: > Hello- > > May I please ping this one? Is there something maybe sub-optimal about > how I organized it? I can adjust or break it into two maybe if that's > helpful. Or else, if it's just that #pragma push_macro is not widely > used or cared about... I thi

Re: Ping: [PATCH] d,ada/spec: only sub nostd{inc,lib} rather than nostd{inc,lib}*

Arsen Arsenović writes: > Ping on this patch. Hello Arsen, and sorry for taking so long to reply. The patch is OK for the Ada part. Cheers, Marc

Re: Ping: [PATCH] gcc/doc: adjust __builtin_choose_expr() description

On 08.10.2024 17:38, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 10/8/24 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 08.10.2024 17:30, Sandra Loosemore wrote: >>> [snip] >>> >>> Hmmm, looking at the complete documentation for this built-in, and the >>> code, I think I'd go a little farther with fixing up the docs. >>> >>> Si

Re: Ping: [PATCH] gcc/doc: adjust __builtin_choose_expr() description

On 10/8/24 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote: On 08.10.2024 17:30, Sandra Loosemore wrote: [snip] Hmmm, looking at the complete documentation for this built-in, and the code, I think I'd go a little farther with fixing up the docs. Since requiring the first operand to be a constant is also different be

Re: Ping: [PATCH] gcc/doc: adjust __builtin_choose_expr() description

On 08.10.2024 17:30, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > On 10/8/24 08:12, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 19.06.2024 16:01, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> Present wording has misled people to believe the ?: operator would be >>> evaluating all three of the involved expressions. >>> >>> gcc/ >>> >>> * doc/extend.texi:

Re: Ping: [PATCH] gcc/doc: adjust __builtin_choose_expr() description

On 10/8/24 08:12, Jan Beulich wrote: On 19.06.2024 16:01, Jan Beulich wrote: Present wording has misled people to believe the ?: operator would be evaluating all three of the involved expressions. gcc/ * doc/extend.texi: Clarify __builtin_choose_expr() similarity to the ?: oper

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

> Sorry for not being fast enough to rewrite the patch on my end to integrate > your changes (I'm maintaining this patch for both gcc 14 and master at the > same time, which is a little complicated), but I appreciate the help :) How > did you figure out the issue so quickly? By comparing what happ

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

I also tried using UNSPEC_PCREL instead of making a new UNSPEC_TLS_WIN32 enumeration, but it unfortunately didn't recognise the resulting RTL. Perhaps something for another day On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 5:19 PM Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Thanks for the patch! You certainly worked that out faster than

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Sorry for not being fast enough to rewrite the patch on my end to integrate your changes (I'm maintaining this patch for both gcc 14 and master at the same time, which is a little complicated), but I appreciate the help :) How did you figure out the issue so quickly? I was going in circles trying t

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Thanks for the patch! You certainly worked that out faster than I could create a reproducer. It's a bit late for me now, so I'll have to try it out tomorrow. Note however that in the final patch I will be only doing TLS for mingw32.h and not cygming.h. The reason for this is that Cygwin likely cann

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

> I'm not quite sure what you mean by a testcase, but when compiling gcc > itself, when libgomp/libgcc (Can't remember which) is being compiled, gcc > will spit out invalid assembly that looks something like > > movabsq $8+__gcov_indirect_call@secrel32, %rax OK, I can reproduce this at -O0: _gco

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Understood. I will try to reproduce the issue in the meantime as I rewrite the patch best regards, Julian On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 5:07 PM Sam James wrote: > Julian Waters writes: > > > Resending again as I forgot to send it to the list > > > >> Sorry, I somehow missed it. :-( Then a configure

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Julian Waters writes: > Resending again as I forgot to send it to the list > >> Sorry, I somehow missed it. :-( Then a configure check should be added in >> the >> compiler to tell whether the detected linker has the fix or not. > >> There are already some specific checks for the PE linker at

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Resending again as I forgot to send it to the list > Sorry, I somehow missed it. :-( Then a configure check should be added in the > compiler to tell whether the detected linker has the fix or not. > There are already some specific checks for the PE linker at configure.ac:6500, > although they d

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

> The linker bug blocking this patch has actually already been fixed, see > https://github.com/bminor/binutils-gdb/commit/72cd2c70977943054ff784b7278cef > 5262288f32 for the patch that fixed it (Thanks for the help Jan!). Sorry, I somehow missed it. :-( Then a configure check should be added in t

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Hi Eric, Thanks for getting back to me, I wasn't actually asking if it was ok (The ping was poorly worded, sorry), more trying to draw attention to the patch. The linker bug blocking this patch has actually already been fixed, see https://github.com/bminor/binutils-gdb/commit/72cd2c70977943054ff78

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

> Pinging https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662860.html > as it has been buried under several other patches. Is the patch ok for > master? No, you should modify it along the way I suggested privately, and a blocker is the missing support in the linker AFAICS. -- Eric Botc

Re: [PING] [PATCH] i386: Implement Thread Local Storage on Windows

Pinging https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662860.html again and also paging for Jan Hubicka, the x86 expert best regards, Julian

Re: [PING] [PATCH v2] gimple ssa: Don't use __builtin_popcount in switch exp transform

On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, Filip Kastl wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to ping my patch. You can find it here > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662744.html > > Btw I forgot to include [PR116616] in the subject. Hope I didn't confuse > people. I will take care to include the ta

Re: [PING][PATCH V4 10/10] autovectorizer: Test autovectorization of different dot-prod modes.

On Thu, 26 Sep 2024, Victor Do Nascimento wrote: > Hello, > > Gentle reminder for this simple renaming update in response to the feedback > from the last iteration. 🙂 OK. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Victor > > > On 9/5/24 12:05, Victor Do Nascimento wrote: > > Changes from previous revision

Re: *PING* [PATCH v3 10/10] fortran: Add -finline-intrinsics flag for MINLOC/MAXLOC [PR90608]

On Sat, Sep 21, 2024 at 04:32:38PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote: > Thanks for the tip. > The Makefile dependencies seem to be incomplete. > Here is what I get: AFAIK right now one needs to configure at least c,c++,fortran,d in --enable-languages (or some superset thereof) and make -C gcc html make -C

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >