On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Paolo Carlini wrote:
tested x86_64-linux, committed to mainline.
Hello,
bugzilla seems to be down, so let me write it here:
the testsuite uses #ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__ to test for the availability
of a 128 bit integer type. I haven't seen a similar define for float128,
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> Agreed. Some parets are missing, though:
>>>
>>> - unsigned long long tmp = (__X) ^ (__X - 1);
>>> - return tmp;
>>> + unsigned long long __tmp = (__X) ^ (__X - 1);
>>> + return __tmp;
>>
>> There is none missing. This is not a macro.
>>
>
On 09/18/2011 09:03 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
the testsuite uses #ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__ to test for the
availability of a 128 bit integer type. I haven't seen a similar
define for float128,
Thanks. For now I went for a configure test, consistently for int and
float, which also allows to check wh
Hi,
Strided accesses of single element or with gaps may require creation
of epilogue loop. At the moment we don't support peeling for outer
loops, therefore, we should not allow such strided accesses in outer
loops.
Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-suse-linux.
Committed to trunk.
Now testing
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 09/18/2011 09:03 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
the testsuite uses #ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__ to test for the availability of
a 128 bit integer type. I haven't seen a similar define for float128,
Thanks. For now I went for a configure test, consistently for in
... probably somebody will hate me, but stylistically I also don't
understand why the uppercases.
Paolo.
Hi,
This patch adds a missing handling of MAX/MIN_EXPR in SLP reduction.
Boostrapped and tested on powerpc64-suse-linux.
Committed to trunk.
Ira
ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/50414
* tree-vect-slp.c (vect_get_constant_vectors): Handle MAX_EXPR and
MIN_EXPR.
testsuite
Hi,
This patch adds an if-statement to avoid loop vectorization and fixes
underscores around restrict in gcc.dg/vect/bb-slp-25.c.
Tested by Dominique on x86_64-apple-darwin10 and on x86_64-suse-linux.
Committed to trunk.
Ira
2011-09-18 Dominique d'Humieres
Ira Rosen
On 09/18/2011 11:07 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Indeed!
The documentation is not clear on whether __int128 and __float128 may
be the same types as say long long and long double, or they are
different types even if they have the same size (the doc was written
for C, where it doesn't matter as much).
Jason Merrill writes:
> On 09/16/2011 04:46 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> struct c_declspecs *
>> -finish_declspecs (struct c_declspecs *specs)
>> +finish_declspecs (struct c_declspecs *specs,
>> + location_t where)
>
> Let's call this first_token_loc, too. And mention it in the
Jason Merrill writes:
> On 09/17/2011 07:08 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> OK, so the patch below extracts a public ggc_alloced_size_for_request
>> function from the different implementations of the ggc allocator's
>> interface, and lets new_linemap use that.
>
> Maybe "ggc_round_alloc_size"?
OK,
Tested on PowerPC/Darwin by Iain and on PowerPC/Linux by me. OK for mainline
and the 4.6/4.5 branches?
2011-09-06 Eric Botcazou
Iain Sandoe
PR target/50091
* config/rs6000/rs6000.md (probe_stack): Use explicit operand.
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (output_pr
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> > On 09/18/2011 09:03 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> > > the testsuite uses #ifdef __SIZEOF_INT128__ to test for the availability
> > > of a 128 bit integer type. I haven't seen a similar define for float128,
> > Th
On 09/18/2011 08:36 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
__int128_t and __uint128_t are legacy typedefs for __int128 and
unsigned __int128.
I didn't realize this. Thus I guess, for 50441 and also for 40856 (which
I'm about to do) better doing everything in terms of __int128 and
unsigned __int128.
Paolo
On 09/18/2011 08:58 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 09/18/2011 08:36 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
__int128_t and __uint128_t are legacy typedefs for __int128 and
unsigned __int128.
I didn't realize this. Thus I guess, for 50441 and also for 40856
(which I'm about to do) better doing everything in ter
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 03:26:21PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 09/17/11 09:16, Alan Modra wrote:
> > This patch series adds shrink-wrap support for PowerPC. The patches
> > are on top of Bernd's "Initial shrink-wrapping patch":
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg02557.html, but
Hi again,
just little more details:
I'm currently blocked by the following issue. If I try to compile,
with -std=gnu++98 (the default for C++) and -pedantic-errors:
template
struct limits;
template<>
struct limits<__int128> { };
template<>
struct limits { };
I get:
a.cc:8:26: error: ISO C+
2011/9/17 Dodji Seketeli :
> OK, so the patch below extracts a public ggc_alloced_size_for_request
> function from the different implementations of the ggc allocator's
> interface, and lets new_linemap use that.
> libcpp/
>
> * include/line-map.h (struct line_maps::alloced_size_for_request):
Hi,
Here attached the second version patch, with changes mentioned previously.
Is it ok?
Thanks-chengbin
2011-09-16 Cheng Bin
* config/arm/bpabi.h (BE8_LINK_SPEC): Add cortex-m arch and
processors.
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Earnshaw
> Sent: Thursday, Septe
Committed
Backport r171225 from mainline
2011-03-21 Rainer Orth
PR bootstrap/48120:
* configure.ac (pwllib): Use LIBS instead of LDFLAGS.
Add -lstdc++ -lm to LIBS.
* configure: Regenerate.
Index: configure
===
Backport from mainline to arm-embedded branch r171096, r171251, r171379,
r171632, r171978, r172297, r174035.
Committed.
2011-09-19 chengbin
Backport r174035 from mainline
2011-05-22 Tom de Vries
PR middle-end/48689
* fold-const.c (fold_checksum_tree): Guard
Hello,
I patched arm-arches.def and re-generated arm-tables.opt using command
"./genopt.sh ../arm > arm-tables.opt" in directory gcc/config/arm. Now the
updated patch is as below. Is it OK to trunk?
BR,
Terry
2011-09-19 Terry Guo
* config/arm/arm-arches.def (armv6s-m): New.
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> > I've decided to not use four new bits from target_flags, and instead
>>> > created a new mask (recip_mask). Four bits would have fit in target
>>> > bits right now, but in the future we might want to add more
>>> > specialization, like m
23 matches
Mail list logo
