Hi,
As described in the PR, a testcase compiled for PowerPC:
struct S {
unsigned a : 30;
unsigned b : 2;
};
int foo (int b)
{
struct S s = {0};
s.b = b;
return bar (0x000b0010, 0x00040100ULL, *(unsigned long *)&s);
}
currently this is compiled to:
foo:
lis 6,0x4
li 5,0
> So the fix is a one-liner that sets subst_low_luid before the
> expand_field_assignment() call. Bootstrapped and tested under i686,
> x86-64, powerpc64. Cross-tested on ARM. I was a bit weary that some
> optimization regression might appear, which will complicate things, but
> everything looks fi
Hi Diego,
This patch adds an .xfail file for the arm-grtev2-linux-gnueabi target
in the integration branch.
-Doug
2012-03-10 Doug Kwan
* contrib/testsuite-management/arm-grtev2-linux-gnueabi.xfail:
New file.
Index: contrib/testsuite-management/arm-grtev2-linux-gnueabi.xf
Steven Bosscher wrote:
This cleans up some remnants of the ancestors of fortran's convert.c,
which was copied from GNAT IIRC. I would bootstrap&test this, but trunk appears
to be broken for x86_64-linux right now (ICE in patch_jump_insn). But I can post
this
for review, at least.
OK for trunk,
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Steven Bosscher wrote:
>>
>> This cleans up some remnants of the ancestors of fortran's convert.c,
>> which was copied from GNAT IIRC. I would bootstrap&test this, but trunk
>> appears to be broken for x86_64-linux right now (ICE in patch_ju
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 11:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
> X86-64 linker optimizes TLS_MODEL_INITIAL_EXEC to TLS_MODEL_LOCAL_EXEC
> by checking
>
> movq foo@gottpoff(%rip), %re
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 15:48 -0600, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Torvald is this what you were thinking of?
Yes, but with an exit in the else branch or something that can cause x
not being read after the condition. I _suppose_ that your original
example would be an allowed transformation but just becau
Tobias Burnus wrote:
If the interface in a PROCEDURE() statement is Bind(C), also the
procedure (pointer) declared in that statement is BIND(C).
From the F2008 standard: "A proc-language-binding-spec without a NAME=
is allowed, but is redundant with the proc-interface required by C1222."
Bui
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 5:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> (define_insn "*call"
>> - [(call (mem:QI (match_operand:P 0 "call_insn_operand" "zw"))
>> + [(call (mem:QI (match_operand:C 0 "call_insn_operand" "zw"))
>> (match_ope
Tobias,
These patches are OK for trunk and fortran-dev.
Many thanks
Paul
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> The attached patch renames (in libgfortran/) the array descriptor's "data"
> field to "base_addr" and "lbound" to "lower_bound".
>
> The reason is that Technical Spe
Am 10.03.2012 11:19, schrieb Tobias Burnus:
Steven Bosscher wrote:
This cleans up some remnants of the ancestors of fortran's convert.c,
which was copied from GNAT IIRC. I would bootstrap&test this, but
trunk appears to be broken for x86_64-linux right now (ICE in
patch_jump_insn). But I can pos
This patch fixes PR52526, a lost wake-up in libitm (ie, one ore more
threads could hang and not get woken up anymore).
The problem was missing handling of one corner case in the futex-based
serial lock implementation (config/linux/rwlock.cc, read_lock()):
Multiple readers would set READERS to 1 an
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 02:20:14PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I would like to update the Go support on the 4.7 branch. As I've
> mentioned before, Go is working toward a stable Go 1 release. That
> release is not complete, but it is quite close. The 4.7 branch was made
> at a slightly unst
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 11:26 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>> X86-64 linker optimizes TLS_MODEL_INITIAL_EXEC to TLS_MODEL_LOCAL_EXEC
>>
Jakub Jelinek writes:
> I'm not very excited by such huge changes, but I've tested this on Fedora 17
> (various architectures) and RHEL6/5 today, let's check this in.
Thanks. Committed.
> But
> certainly no further such large change will be accepted on the 4.7 branch.
Understood.
> FYI, on
Hi,
Pmode may be SImode for TARGET_64BIT. This patch checks Pmode instead
of TARGET_64BIT in lwp_slwpcb. Tested on Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2012-03-02 H.J. Lu
* config/i386/i386.md (lwp_slwpcb): Check Pmode instead of
TARGET_64BIT.
diff --git a/gcc/co
On 10/03/12 01:16 , Doug Kwan wrote:
* contrib/testsuite-management/arm-grtev2-linux-gnueabi.xfail:
New file.
OK.
Diego.
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 04:27:47PM -0500, John David Anglin wrote:
> Tested on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu and committed to trunk.
>
> Ok for 4.7?
Ok, but please leave the two TLS: lines out (similarly how they are left out
for other targets) for now.
> @@ -3288,3 +3613,5 @@
> OBJECT:8:_ZTTSo@@GLIBC
Work around limited alignment of common.
Tested on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk.
Ok for 4.7?
Dave
--
J. David Anglin dave.ang...@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)
Tested on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk.
Ok for 4.7?
Dave
--
J. David Anglin dave.ang...@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)
2012-03-10 John David Anglin
On 7 March 2012 05:22, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
> very much.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html
I think this looks OK but I'm not familiar with those details of the
testsuite - do any ARM or other
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 3:22 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> This patches uses word_mode instead of Pmode in loop expand since
>> word_mode may have bigger size than Pmode. OK for trunk?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> H.J.
>> ---
>> 2012-03-02 H.J. Lu
>>
>>
Hi,
This patch replaces DImode with Pmode on x86_64 this parameter. OK
for trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2012-03-10 H.J. Lu
* config/i386/i386.c (x86_this_parameter): Replace DImode with
Pmode.
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index bc144a9..bfa3cdc 10
Hi,
x86 trampoline depends on ptr_mode. This patch checks ptr_mode, instead
of TARGET_X32. Also we should use Pmode for address mode. Tested on
Linux/x86-64. OK for trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2012-03-10 H.J. Lu
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_trampoline_init): Use movl for 64bit if
24 matches
Mail list logo
