On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> The point here is that, a group of changes that broke C bootstrap went
> in undetected for several days, because of the partially C++ default. To
> prevent that in the future, we should enforce similar checking in both C
> and C++.
As opp
Meador Inge writes:
> v2 OK? If so, would you mind committing for me? I don't have write access.
Applied, thanks. (BTW, I removed the brackets around the new condition.)
Richard
Jim MacArthur writes:
> On 02/05/12 14:55, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Richard Earnshaw writes:
>>> On 02/05/12 14:00, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Jim MacArthur writes:
> New Changelog text:
>
> 2012-05-02 Jim MacArthur
> * recog.c (reg_fits_class_p): Check both regno and regno
On 16/05/12 17:43, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
OK (if no regressions).
Cross tested with no regressions, and committed.
Thanks
Andrew
ace /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/ada/ali.adb
-o
ada/ali.o
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) [trunk revision 187647] (i586-suse-linux) GCC
error:|
| in varpool_finalize_decl, at cgraphunit.c:822|
| Er
On Wed, 16 May 2012, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> currently build of Mozilla with -flto-partition=none fails at:
> /tmp/ccQ0smdA.ltrans3.ltrans.o:ccQ0smdA.ltrans3.o:function
> scriptableInvokeDefault(NPObject*, _NPVariant const*, unsigned int,
> _NPVariant*) [clone .part.84.4761]: error: undefi
>
On Thu, 17 May 2012, David Miller wrote:
>
> Richard, I was looking into a testsuite failure on the 4.7 branch
> on sparc and I think your fix for 52584 would fix it too.
>
> The problem eminates in gcc.c-torture/execute/vector-shift2.c with -O0
>
> The 4 integer vector shifts get lowered to 2
On 2012/5/18 03:26 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Chung-Lin Tang
> wrote:
>
>> The point here is that, a group of changes that broke C bootstrap went
>> in undetected for several days, because of the partially C++ default. To
>> prevent that in the future, we shou
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Ping.
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> On Tue, 8 May 2012, Michael Matz wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, 7 May 2012, Mike Stump wrote:
>>
>> > On May 7, 2012, at 6:11 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
>> > > I'd like to retain the #if 0 code therein,
>> >
>> > Ca
On Thu, 17 May 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> This patch gives up on using the reassociation rank algorithm to
> correctly place __builtin_powi calls and their feeding multiplies. In
> the end this proved to introduce more complexity than it saved, due in
> part to the poor fit of introducing
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 12-05-17 10:52 , Michael Matz wrote:
>
>> Cross the bridge when you reach it, not before. Not everybody agrees that
>> the splitting of tree would be a good idea. Right now templates aren't
>> necessary, so you shouldn't use them. (well
ata -W -Wall -nostdinc -I- -I. -Iada -I/home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/ada
> -I/home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/ada/gcc-interface /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/ada/ali.adb
> -o
> ada/ali.o
> +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
> | 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) [trunk re
> The problem here seems to be that Ada constructs an variable that is
> DECL_EXTERNAL, passes const_value_known_p and has DECL_INITIAL, yet its
> TREE_STATIC is not set. C++ always output those variables with TREE_STATIC
> set and to be honest, I am unsure what is intended semantics of this flag
>
> > The problem here seems to be that Ada constructs an variable that is
> > DECL_EXTERNAL, passes const_value_known_p and has DECL_INITIAL, yet its
> > TREE_STATIC is not set. C++ always output those variables with TREE_STATIC
> > set and to be honest, I am unsure what is intended semantics of thi
=GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) [trunk revision 187647] (i586-suse-linux) GCC
error:|
| in function_and_variable_visibility, at ipa.c:918|
| Error detected around /home/eric/svn/gcc/gcc/ada/ali.adb:2499:1
Note that the bootstrap is
/ada/ali.adb
> -o
> ada/ali.o
> +===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
> | 4.8.0 20120518 (experimental) [trunk revision 187647] (i586-suse-linux) GCC
> error:|
> | in function_and_variable_visibility, at ipa.c:918|
&g
Hi,
I found a few changes were needed to the dwarf2 pass when trying to
implement epilogue unwind for SH, mainly that the current handling of
annulled-taken branches does not seem correct; the delay slot insn
should be handled in a manner similar to an insn in the fallthru block.
Cross-tested on
And here are the backend parts for supporting epilogue unwind for SH,
ccing Kaz. Note that this needs the prior dwarf2 pass changes in too, or
else occasional ICEs ensue.
About the issue on unneeded post-return CFI, mentioned before on
libc-alpha, this patch currently does produce such directives.
This fixes another fallout of proper strided load support.
vect_compute_data_ref_alignment can just bail out for them.
Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress.
Richard.
2012-05-18 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/53390
* tree-vect-data-refs.c (vect
In PR53346 we vectorize a simple memset loop very inefficiently.
But of course we should have detected this and transformed the
loop into a memset! Seems like we only do that if the original
loop does sth else than memset as well.
Fixed as follows.
Bootstrap and regtest on x86_64-unknown-linux-
Hi,
my apologize for the breakage. I somehow missed Ada in --enable-languages
list. I've comitted the following fix that also cures enable checking failure
of g++.dg/torture/pr46154.C
Honza
* cgraphunit.c (varpool_finalize_decl): Allow external decls.
(mark_functions_to_output):
On 12-05-18 06:14 , Richard Guenther wrote:
As you retain the macros anyway you can simply not return anything
from the C++ checking functions define to a stmt expression
({ check_in_cxx (t); t; })
Sure, but that takes us back to the original gdb issue: it does not
understand statement expres
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 12-05-18 06:14 , Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> As you retain the macros anyway you can simply not return anything
>> from the C++ checking functions define to a stmt expression
>> ({ check_in_cxx (t); t; })
>
>
> Sure, but that takes us bac
On 18 May 2012 12:46, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 12-05-18 06:14 , Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> As you retain the macros anyway you can simply not return anything
>> from the C++ checking functions define to a stmt expression
>> ({ check_in_cxx (t); t; })
>
>
> Sure, but that takes us back to the or
Committed as obvious.
Richard.
2012-05-18 Richard Guenther
* gcc.dg/pr53352.c: Return zero.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr53352.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr53352.c (revision 187652)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr
On Fri, 18 May 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> In PR53346 we vectorize a simple memset loop very inefficiently.
> But of course we should have detected this and transformed the
> loop into a memset! Seems like we only do that if the original
> loop does sth else than memset as well.
>
> Fixed
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> On 2012/5/18 03:26 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Chung-Lin Tang
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The point here is that, a group of changes that broke C bootstrap went
>>> in undetected for several days, because of the pa
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
> On 05/17/2012 03:02 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> After agonising over this for a couple of days, I think it's probably
>> the correct fix. What we're doing now would be valid if the only use of
>> equiv_constant(x) were to substitute for
Ping?
Teresa
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> Ping?
> Teresa
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
>>
>> On David's suggestion, I have removed the changes that rename niter_desc
>> to
>> loop_desc from this patch to focus the patch on the unrolling cha
On 05/18/2012 09:16 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
>> On 05/17/2012 03:02 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>>> After agonising over this for a couple of days, I think it's probably
>>> the correct fix. What we're doing now would be valid if the only use o
On 05/18/2012 09:16 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Meador Inge wrote:
>> On 05/17/2012 03:02 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>>> After agonising over this for a couple of days, I think it's probably
>>> the correct fix. What we're doing now would be valid if the only use o
This repairs the bootstrap issue due to unsafe signed overflow
assumptions. Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
with no new regressions. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Bill
2012-05-18 Bill Schmidt
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (print_operand): Revise code that unsafely
Hello Paolo,
On May 16, 2012, at 15:17 , Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> + install-no-fixedincludes:
...
>> +$(MAKE) $(FLAGS_TO_PASS) install
This uncovered a latent problem that my light re-testing after
the apparently innocent switch to a sequence of commands, per
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/
> my apologize for the breakage. I somehow missed Ada in --enable-languages
> list. I've comitted the following fix that also cures enable checking
> failure of g++.dg/torture/pr46154.C
No problem, thanks for the quick fix!
--
Eric Botcazou
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:00 AM, William J. Schmidt
wrote:
> This repairs the bootstrap issue due to unsafe signed overflow
> assumptions. Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
> with no new regressions. Ok for trunk?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
> 2012-05-18 Bill Schmidt
>
>
Il 18/05/2012 17:34, Olivier Hainque ha scritto:
> Hello Paolo,
>
> On May 16, 2012, at 15:17 , Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> + install-no-fixedincludes:
> ...
>>> + $(MAKE) $(FLAGS_TO_PASS) install
>
> This uncovered a latent problem that my light re-testing after
> the apparently innocent switch t
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:49:41AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 11:00 AM, William J. Schmidt
> wrote:
> > This repairs the bootstrap issue due to unsafe signed overflow
> > assumptions. Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
> > with no new regressions.
On May 18, 2012, at 17:59 , Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> * Makefile.in (FLAGS_TO_PASS): Pass $(libexecsubdir) instead of
>> $(libsubdir) as libexecsubdir.
>
> Yes, ok. FLAGS_TO_PASS is only used by Ada until now.
Installed, thanks :)
Richard Guenther writes:
> In PR53346 we vectorize a simple memset loop very inefficiently.
> But of course we should have detected this and transformed the
> loop into a memset! Seems like we only do that if the original
> loop does sth else than memset as well.
Is there a way to turn this off
From: Richard Guenther
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 11:48:55 +0200 (CEST)
> On Thu, 17 May 2012, David Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> Richard, I was looking into a testsuite failure on the 4.7 branch
>> on sparc and I think your fix for 52584 would fix it too.
>>
>> The problem eminates in gcc.c-torture/exec
Backport from trunk r187586
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-05/msg00583.html
Enable -fstack-protector support for Android targets.
The patch only affects targets where __BIONIC__ is defined.
Built Android arm toolchain.
Would like to commit the patch to google/gcc-4_6 and
google/gcc-4_6_2-mob
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Jing Yu wrote:
> 2012-05-18 Jing Yu
>
> Backport from trunk r187586:
> 2012-05-16 Igor Zamyatin
> * configure.ac: Stack protector enabling for Android targets.
> * configure: Regenerate.
OK.
Diego.
The following patch improves pseudos splitting.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86/x86-64.
Committed as rev. 187656.
2012-05-18 Vladimir Makarov
* lra-constraints.c (need_for_split_p): Split only when there
are at
least 3 potential reloads instead of 2.
Index:
On 05/16/2012 05:29 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
- if (cgraph_function_possibly_inlined_p (decl))
+ if (function_possibly_abstracted_p (decl))
add_AT_unsigned (subr_die, DW_AT_inline, DW_INL_declared_inlined);
else
add_AT_unsigned (subr_die, DW_AT_inl
This patch to the Go frontend fixes an erroneous use of VEC, pointed out
by Diego. The macro magic behind VEC is such that this didn't make any
difference. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Committed to mainline and 4.7 branch.
Ian
diff -r 4c5b81b8add0 go/gogo-tree.cc
--- a/g
Michael,
Thanks for reviewing the patch and all the suggestions.
I have some questions / comments bellow.
Regards,
Edmar
On 05/17/2012 06:16 PM, Michael Meissner wrote:
In the patch I minimized the number of changes, while not adding
any new mask to target_flags.
While we may get some bits
Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > - Should I try to improve forwprop to handle casts and additional re-
> > association cases until it handles the above expression?
>
> Yes, ideally by trying to sub-divide this task into separate profitable
> tran
The compiler aborts on the testcase in LTO mode because of a record type with a
size expression containing a CALL_EXPR at the global level. The simple fix is
to elaborate the size expression like in all the other cases.
Tested on i586-suse-linux, applied on the mainline and 4.7 branch.
2012-0
> Why do you need this change? As long as we're setting DW_AT_inline, it
> shouldn't matter what its value is.
It's 0 for the nested function without it.
> If we are looking at the DIE for something from a function in non-unit
> scope, this will return comp_unit_die() where previously it would h
On 2012/05/18 18:35:32, jingyu wrote:
Backport from trunk r187586
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-05/msg00583.html
Enable -fstack-protector support for Android targets.
The patch only affects targets where __BIONIC__ is defined.
Built Android arm toolchain.
Would like to commit the pa
Hi,
this is a regression present on mainline and 4.7 branch or, more precisely, if
you use recent GNU linkers with LTO plugin. During the link phase, gnatlink
can decide to use a response file to pass a very long line to the linker. It
was actually using a linker script with the GNU linker, b
On 5/18/2012 4:27 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
I finally got some time to look into this in detail. The various special-
case transforms in associate_plusminus all transform a plus/minus expression
tree into either a single operand, a negated operand, or a single plus or
minus of two operands. Th
On 05/18/2012 04:48 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Why do you need this change? As long as we're setting DW_AT_inline, it
shouldn't matter what its value is.
It's 0 for the nested function without it.
Ah, I thought that having DW_AT_inline of DW_INL_not_inlined was enough
to mark it as an abstrac
This patch is for the google/gcc-4_6 branch.
Fission improvements and bug fixes. Adds new DW_OP_GNU_const_index to
handle TLS offsets in debug info. Adds -gpubnames/-gno-pubnames options
to explicitly request .debug_pubnames/pubtypes sections. Adds style
parameter to C/C++ pretty-printer so tha
Chung-Lin Tang wrote:
> And here are the backend parts for supporting epilogue unwind for SH,
> ccing Kaz. Note that this needs the prior dwarf2 pass changes in too, or
> else occasional ICEs ensue.
>
> About the issue on unneeded post-return CFI, mentioned before on
> libc-alpha, this patch curr
On 05/18/12 05:06, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Can you locate those? I mean, most uses look like
>
> #define DECL_NONSHAREABLE(NODE) \
> (TREE_CHECK2 (NODE, VAR_DECL, \
> RESULT_DECL)->decl_common.decl_nonshareable_flag)
>
> thus they only dereference the result, not assign it an
This patch makes a lot of changes to the behavior of .debug_pubnames
that I haven't seen any discussion of, and that don't seem obvious to
me. Can you point me at discussion threads?
http://codereview.appspot.com/6197069/diff/1/gcc/dwarf2out.c
File gcc/dwarf2out.c (left):
http://codereview.app
On 16 May 2012 14:51, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 11.05.2012 16:48, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
>>
>> I would change the iterator from VQX to VQ in the pattern above (you
>> can also simplify the setting of neon_type in that case as well as
>> change that to be a vec_duplicate as below and get rid
Hi Jasaon,
Thanks so much for reviewing this patch. I realize it is a lot to see.
The motivation and new dwarf attributes and tags all stem from the debug
fission project as described at http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/DebugFission. I
have several more patches dealing with fission coming.
Fission has b
On 12-05-18 18:14 , Richard Henderson wrote:
On 05/18/12 05:06, Richard Guenther wrote:
Can you locate those? I mean, most uses look like
#define DECL_NONSHAREABLE(NODE) \
(TREE_CHECK2 (NODE, VAR_DECL, \
RESULT_DECL)->decl_common.decl_nonshareable_flag)
thus they only dere
On 12-05-18 08:23 , Jay Foad wrote:
What's wrong with:
(check_in_cxx(t), t)
?
This evaluates 't' twice.
Diego.
On 5/17/12, Mike Stump wrote:
> On May 17, 2012, at 2:41 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>>> Reusing the compiler for this seems like the only way to go.
>>> But, we did look at using g++ to parse C++ expressions from gdb,
>>> and it was too slow :-(. We're going to look again, at least to
>>> generate
On 5/18/12, Diego Novillo wrote:
> So, I would like to figure out what to do with this. We have
> a usability problem wrt deubgging that I would like to fix.
> The only way we have of using all the tree accessor macros from
> GDB is to convert the checks into functions (converting the actual
> ac
63 matches
Mail list logo
