Go patch committed: Use backend interface for send statement

2011-04-15 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
This patch to the Go frontend uses the backend interface for the send statement. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian diff -r 4bbcd245a88a go/expressions.cc --- a/go/expressions.cc Thu Apr 14 21:05:53 2011 -0700 +++ b/go/expressions.cc Fri Ap

Re: [PATCH, rs6000 committed] Fix PowerPC bootstrap

2011-04-15 Thread Pat Haugen
On 04/12/2011 08:22 PM, Alan Modra wrote: On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 04:00:45PM -0500, Pat Haugen wrote: > --- gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c (revision 172327) > +++ gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c (working copy) > @@ -7976,7 +7976,7 @@ call_ABI_of_interest (tree fndecl) > return true; > >

go patch committed: Add compound_statement to backend interface

2011-04-15 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
This patch to the Go frontends adds a convenience function compound_statement to build a statement list from two statements. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian 2011-04-15 Ian Lance Taylor * go-gcc.cc (Gcc_backend::compound_statem

[Patch, Fortran, committed] PR 18918 - Minor coarray fix

2011-04-15 Thread Tobias Burnus
The attached patch fixes an ICE for scalar coarray with -fcoarray=lib. Additionally, I have change the dg-do compile into a run, which I forgot to do when initially submitting the patch. Committed as Rev. 172522. Tobias PS: All coarray*.f90 dg-do run test also work with "-fcoarray=lib -lcaf_

Re: Implement stack arrays even for unknown sizes

2011-04-15 Thread Michael Matz
Hi, On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Jerry DeLisle wrote: > > I'll make the DECL_EXPR conditional on the size being variable. As > > Tobias already okayed the patch I'm planning to check in the slightly > > modified variant as below, after a new round of testing. > > Thats A-OK r172524 Ciao, Michael.

[Patch, Fortran] PR 48624 - fix DECL for external procedures with proc arguments

2011-04-15 Thread Tobias Burnus
Hi all, the following patch fixes an issue with a multiple decl for procedures with procedure dummy arguments. Without the patch, multiple declarations are generated, which causes link failures ("euler" is optimized away) with -fwhole-program. (Thanks goes to Richard for spotting the problem

Re: PATCH: PR middle-end/48440: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/labels-3.c

2011-04-15 Thread Steve Ellcey
I was curious if anyone was still looking at this problem? I see this on IA64 HP-UX in 32 bit mode where ptr_mode(SImode) != Pmode(DImode). As H.J. points out, expand_expr_real_2 is calling simplify_gen_subreg (expr.c, line 7366) and at that point op0 is "(label_ref/v:DI 32)" and innermode is SImo

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR 48624 - fix DECL for external procedures with proc arguments

2011-04-15 Thread Steve Kargl
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 12:30:01AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote: > > I have no idea why there should be a problem with inlining (cf. deleted > comment), but removing that part did not give any test suite failure > (check-gfortran + libgomp's check). Additionally, I have build and run > the Polyhe

Re: PATCH: PR middle-end/48440: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/labels-3.c

2011-04-15 Thread Michael Matz
Hi Steve, On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Steve Ellcey wrote: > I was curious if anyone was still looking at this problem? I didn't because it occurred only on an experimental port. > I see this on IA64 HP-UX in 32 bit mode Which means it also occurs with something else now (well, ia64 hp-ux, but at lea

Fix PR48629

2011-04-15 Thread Bernd Schmidt
This is a typo/thinko introduced with one of my recent scheduler patches. Rather than flag_sched_pressure we have to use sched_pressure_p, which accurately is only set during sched1. Bootstrapped and tested on i686-linux, and committed as obvious. Bernd Index: ChangeLog ==

Re: [C++0x] Range-based for statements and ADL

2011-04-15 Thread Jason Merrill
Applied (with a few formatting tweaks). Thanks, Jason

[v3] libstdc++/48635

2011-04-15 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, tested x86_64-linux, committed mainline and 4_6-branch. Paolo. // 2011-04-15 Daniel Krugler Paolo Carlini PR libstdc++/48635 * include/bits/unique_ptr.h (unique_ptr<>::operator=(unique_ptr&&), unique_ptr<>::operator=(unique_ptr<>&&),

[v3] libstdc++/48631

2011-04-15 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, tested x86_64-linux, committed mainline and 4_6-branch. Paolo. 2011-04-15 Daniel Krugler Paolo Carlini PR libstdc++/48631 * include/bits/unique_ptr.h (default_delete<_Tp[]>): Add deleted function call operator. * tes

Re: [PATCH, SMS] New flag to apply SMS when SC equals 1

2011-04-15 Thread Revital Eres
Hello, > If it's for debugging, can you use a --parm instead (like > modulo-sched-min-sc or similar)? > I think I can use --param for debugging purposes in this case. (I might add modulo-sched-max-sc as well) Thanks, Revital > Thanks, > Richard. > >> Thanks, >> Revital >> >> Changelog: >> >>  

Re: [PATCH, ARM] PR47855 Compute attr "length" for some thumb2 insns, 2/3

2011-04-15 Thread Carrot Wei
Hi Richard Thank you for the detailed explanation. It sounds like an inherent difficulty of rtl passes. Then the only opportunity is ldrb/strb instructions because they never affect cc registers. thanks Carrot On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 21

[PATCH] Fix SLP vectorization of shifts (PR tree-optimization/48616)

2011-04-15 Thread Jakub Jelinek
Hi! As the attached testcase shows, while the current detection of what shifts are by scalar and what shifts are by vector shift count may work well for loop vectorizer (vect_internal_def being vector shift, vect_external_def or vect_constant_def scalar shift), it is incorrect for SLP, where vect_

Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR 48624 - fix DECL for external procedures with proc arguments

2011-04-15 Thread Tobias Burnus
Steve Kargl wrote: The comment comes from r170414, which suggest there is a problem if a procedure is in an argument list, and that procedure gets in-lined. [...] Perhaps, looking at the -fdump-tree-original on whole_file_32.f90 may shed light on the situation. Well, it does not. The function

<    1   2