Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR53643 Fix INTENT(OUT) for class arrays

Dear Tobias, I had earmarked this one to fix myself! It's good for trunk. Thanks Paul On 13 June 2012 09:54, Tobias Burnus wrote: > gfortran had an ICE with intent(out) class arrays - and with (polymorphic) > scalar coarrays. > > Build and regtested on x86-64-linux. > OK for the trunk? > > To

Re: RFA: better gimplification of compound literals

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > >> > Ok, I see the C frontend hands us this as >> > >> >  return  VEC_PERM_EXPR < a , b , <<< Unknown tree: compound_literal_expr >> >    v4si D.1712 = { 0, 4, 1, 5 }; >>> > ; >> > >> > an

[PATCH, committed] Fix PR53647

It turns out we have some old machine descriptions that have no L1 cache, so we must account for a zero line size. Regstrapped on powerpc64-linux-unknown-gnu with no new failures, committed as obvious. Thanks, Bill 2012-06-13 Bill Schmidt PR tree-optimization/53647 * tree-ss

Re: Make timevar phases mutually exclusive. (issue6302064)

On 12-06-11 14:45 , Lawrence Crowl wrote: The intent of the phases was to have a high-level but mutually exclusive accounting of compile time. We want to track compile time in a way that tells us which conceptual phases are taking the most time. That intent is not currently satisfied. This pat

[arm] Remove obsolete FPA support (1/n): obsolete target removal

This patch is the first of a series to remove support for the now obsolete FPA and Maverick co-processors. This patch removes those targets and configuration options that were marked as deprecated in GCC-4.7 and removes the config fragments that depended on them. * config.gcc (unsupported

Re: [arm] Remove obsolete FPA support (1/n): obsolete target removal

On 06/13/2012 02:51 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: (arm*-*-rtems*): Remove. For RTEMS the intention was to rename arm*-*-rtemseabi* into arm*-*-rtems* and provide an arm*-*-rtemself* legacy target. My personal opinion is to avoid a arm*-*-rtemself* legacy target, but it was decided othe

[PATCH, GCC][AArch64] Fix diagnostics issues

Hi, This patch fixes some diagnostics wording and formatting issues in the AArch64 port. A patch that adds missing test cases for some of these diagnostics will be sent separately. Thanks Sofiane - 2012-06-11 Sofiane Naci [AArch64] Fix diagnosis issues. * config/aarch64/

Re: [Ada] Use C++-compatible calling convention on x86/Windows

> Tested on i686-pc-mingw32, applied on the mainline and 4.7 branch. > > > 2012-05-19 Eric Botcazou > > * gcc-interface/decl.c (Has_Thiscall_Convention): New macro. > (gnat_to_gnu_entity) : Test it to set the thiscall > calling convention > (get_minimal_subprog_decl): Lik

RE: [PATCH, GCC][AArch64] Use Enums for code models option selection

Hi, I discovered a bug in my previous patch, so I attach a new one. The ChangeLog hasn't changed. OK to commit? Thanks Sofiane > -Original Message- > From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On > Behalf Of Sofiane Naci > Sent: 31 May 2012 10:55 > To: gcc

Re: [arm] Remove obsolete FPA support (1/n): obsolete target removal

It will naturally disappear when gcc does the clean up. It won't be around long. Sebastian Huber wrote: >On 06/13/2012 02:51 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: >> (arm*-*-rtems*): Remove. > >For RTEMS the intention was to rename arm*-*-rtemseabi* into arm*-*-rtems* and >provide an arm*-*-rtemse

Re: [RFA:] Caveat for ARM in gcc-4.7/changes.html: unaligned accesses

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 01:16:09 +0200 > +to be compiled with -mno-unaligned-accesses. Better spelled as "-mno-unaligned-access". Bah. brgds, H-P

<    1   2