On 09/11/2012 03:05 AM, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Christian Bruel wrote:
>> This patch implements the simple_return pattern to enable -fshrink-wrap
>> on SH. It also clean up some redundancies for expand_epilogue (called
>> twice from the "return" and "epilogue" patterns and the
>> sh_expand_prologue p
On 09/11/2012 01:52 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Remove unnecessary VEC function overloads.
Several VEC member functions that accept an element 'T' used to have
two overloads: one taking 'T', the second taking 'T *'.
They might be unnecessary, but with your patch bootstrapping fails here
with th
Hi Kaz,
Any news for my sh-superh-elf --with-newlib patch ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00137.html
Thanks
Christian
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> Here's the revised patch with a param. Bootstrapped and tested in the
> same manner. Ok for trunk?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
> 2012-08-10 Bill Schmidt
>
> * doc/invoke.texi (max-slsr-cand-scan): New description.
>
This is the trunk variant of the 54515 fix - we shouldn't really
return NULL_TREE from get_base_address apart from for invalid
inputs (and then it's just GIGO). This makes us go half-way to
fix the PR, I'll followup with a patch to look through
WITH_SIZE_EXPR (after thinking about effects on alia
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 09:11 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>> Can you please help me get a start on how to get can be done? From
>> what I understand (please correct me if I am wrong), this requires
>> rearranging and duplicating a lot of passes and c
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 09:09 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>>> >If that's the case, what's the point in defining an external ABI and
>>> >defining what
>>> >__attribute__((vector)) placed on a function declaration means?
>
>> When you have __attribut
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 09/10/2012 09:09 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
>If that's the case, what's the point in defining an external ABI and
>defining what
>__attribute__((vector)) plac
Christian Bruel wrote:
> Any news for my sh-superh-elf --with-newlib patch ?
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00137.html
The patch is OK for both 4.7 and 4.8. Sorry for the delay.
Regards,
kaz
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:01 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 12:26 AM, Dehao Chen wrote:
>>> Hi, Diego,
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot for the review. I've updated the patch.
>>>
>>> This patch is large and may easily break build
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> In this failing testcase the LIM pass writes to g_13 regardless of the
> initial value of g_13, which is the test protecting the write. This causes
> an incorrect store data race wrt both the C++ memory model and transactional
> memory (the
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
> Btw, this then happily fits into my suggestion that the "elementalness"
> can be autodetected by the compiler simply by means of a proper IPA
> pass and thus be fully LTO / whole-program aware. No need for an
> attribute (where you'd nee
Hi Maintainers,
This patch enables "prefetchw" ISA in the processor alias table for targets
amdfam10,barcelona and bdver1,2 and btver1,2.
GCC regression test passes with the patch.
Ok for trunk?
Change log:
2012-09-11 Venkataramanan Kumar
* config/i386/i386.c (processor_alias_table):
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 03:57:44AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Richard Guenther
> wrote:
>
> > Btw, this then happily fits into my suggestion that the "elementalness"
> > can be autodetected by the compiler simply by means of a proper IPA
> > pass and thus be
Thank you for the detail comments.
The updated patched is attached. Is it OK?
Thanks!
-Zhenqiang
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Botcazou [mailto:ebotca...@adacore.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 1:01 AM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH]
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> On 09/11/2012 01:52 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>>
>> Remove unnecessary VEC function overloads.
>>
>> Several VEC member functions that accept an element 'T' used to have
>> two overloads: one taking 'T', the second taking 'T *'.
>
>
> They mig
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 03:57:44AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Richard Guenther
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Btw, this then happily fits into my suggestion that the "elementalness"
>> > can be autodetected by the
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 03:57:44AM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Richard Guenther
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Btw, this then happily fits into my suggestion that the "elementalness"
>> > can be autodetected by the
2012-09-10 Maciej W. Rozycki
gcc/
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (print_operand) <'c'>: Remove.
* config/rs6000/spe.md: Remove a leftover comment.
Okay.
This patch wasn't sent to gcc-patches -- can we see it please?
Segher
> Fixed with the attached.
Followed by the same failure on darwin. Fixed with
--- ../_clean/gcc/config/darwin.c 2012-07-09 22:06:21.0 +0200
+++ ../p_work/gcc/config/darwin.c 2012-09-11 11:53:02.0 +0200
@@ -1878,7 +1878,7 @@ darwin_asm_named_section (const char *na
On 10 September 2012 19:30, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 10/09/12 16:40, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>> Why do we have to keep room for the predicate here? (%?) Doesn't this
>> pattern match only in unconditional cases?
>>
>
> Because the ARM back-end has a very late conditionalizer pass that can
> als
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Richard Guenther
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
Whether or not the compiler creates a clone COULD BE totally up to the
compiler, based on whether or not vectorization is enabled,
The backport of the patch for PR53572 caused us to remove unused
decls at -O0, a regresion on the branch - fixed by the following.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2012-09-11 Richard Guenther
PR debug/54534
* cgraph.h (varpool_can_remove
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:29:10PM +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
> >Btw, this then happily fits into my suggestion that the "elementalness"
> >can be autodetected by the compiler simply by means of a proper IPA
> >pass and thus be fully LTO / whole-program aware. No need for an
> >attribute (where you
On 11/09/12 11:25, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 10 September 2012 19:30, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>> On 10/09/12 16:40, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>> Why do we have to keep room for the predicate here? (%?) Doesn't this
>>> pattern match only in unconditional cases?
>>>
>>
>> Because the ARM back-end h
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:29:10PM +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
Note that, apart from preventing external calls, it removes this use case:
__attribute__((vector(4))) double mysqrt(double x){return sqrt(x);}
__m256d var;
mysqrt(var);
I don't think those
Hello,
here is a patch that turns {v[1],v[0]} into vec_perm_expr(v,v,{1,0}) if
the target is ok with it.
I am attaching 2 versions of the patch. p-good is the one that passes
testing. p-bad, where I rely on fold_stmt to detect identity permutations,
ICEs towards the end of the pass while che
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > 2012-09-10 Maciej W. Rozycki
> > >
> > > gcc/
> > > * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (print_operand) <'c'>: Remove.
> > > * config/rs6000/spe.md: Remove a leftover comment.
> >
> > Okay.
>
> This patch wasn't sent to gcc-pa
Any comment?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg02098.html
Maybe separately on the technical and political aspects?
On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, Marc Glisse wrote:
With the patch...
On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch copies some more vector extensions from the C fro
Hello,
any advice?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00044.html
On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch passes bootstrap+testsuite. It is probably wrong in many ways, but
I don't know enough to do more without some advice.
The goal is to recognize that v[0]+v[1
On 2012-09-11 03:58 , Tobias Burnus wrote:
Did you test with or without Graphite?
I tested with and without release checking, all languages and all
targets that use VEC. So many combinations... how is graphite enabled?
Diego.
On 2012-09-11 05:35 , Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 09/11/2012 01:52 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Remove unnecessary VEC function overloads.
Several VEC member functions that accept an element 'T' used to have
two overloads: one taking 'T', the
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 2012-09-11 03:58 , Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
>> Did you test with or without Graphite?
>
>
> I tested with and without release checking, all languages and all targets
> that use VEC. So many combinations... how is graphite enabled?
By havin
On 2012-09-11 06:12 , Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
Fixed with the attached.
Followed by the same failure on darwin. Fixed with
--- ../_clean/gcc/config/darwin.c 2012-07-09 22:06:21.0 +0200
+++ ../p_work/gcc/config/darwin.c 2012-09-11 11:53:02.0 +0200
@@ -1878,7 +1878,
On 09/11/2012 01:41 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
On 2012-09-11 03:58 , Tobias Burnus wrote:
Did you test with or without Graphite?
I tested with and without release checking, all languages and all
targets that use VEC. So many combinations...
There is unfortunately always an N+1 configuration
On 2012-09-11 01:01 , Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Ian, could you commit the changes in go/gofrontend?
Done. Actually, it looks like you already committed them, but I
brought the master repo up to date.
Yes, sorry. I'm not quite sure how t
ok with
&& gimple_assign_lhs_ptr (loc->stmt) == loc->ref
instead. Let's hope we conservatively catch all writes to ref this way (which
is what we need, right)?
Yes.
Thanks. Committing the attached patch.
PR middle-end/54149
* tree-ssa-loop-im.c (execute_sm_if_changed_
Hello,
While testing the patch to enable shrink-wrapping on SH [PR54546], we
hit an the "error: EDGE_CROSSING missing across section boundary"
Indeed, shrink-wrap duplicates a bb with successors (containing the
return sequence) into an unlikely section. I first thought about setting
the EDGE_CROS
> This is ok, of course.
Then could you please commit it (I don't have write access)?
TIA
Dominique
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:03 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On 2012-09-11 01:01 , Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Diego Novillo
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Ian, could you commit the changes in go/gofrontend?
>>
>>
>> Done. Actually, it looks like you already committed them,
> Does this restriction look right to you ? (regression tests are still
> running on x86 and sh)
Please generate your patches with diff -up (or svn diff -x -up).
> + && (BB_PARTITION (e->src) == BB_PARTITION (e->dest))
No need for parentheses around this check.
The shrink wrapping c
Add -fno-short-enums flag to test c-c++-common/pr51712.c as discussed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51712.
This removes the excess warning that caused the test to fail.
Tested in arm-none-eabi configuration. The test now passes.
Comment? Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
gcc/testsuite
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 01:46:37PM +0100, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote:
> Add -fno-short-enums flag to test c-c++-common/pr51712.c as discussed in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51712.
> This removes the excess warning that caused the test to fail.
> Tested in arm-none-eabi configuration. Th
Hi,
This allows the auto-vectorizer to use vfma under Ofast or ffast-math.
I have a follow-up patch which will add support for these from
arm_neon.h as well before someone asks. It's being regression tested as
we speak and that'll follow shortly.
Tested on A15 silicon native with no regressio
Hi,
your patch broke bootstrapping here:
/home/tob/projects/gcc-git/gcc/gcc/doc//sourcebuild.texi:1537: Node
`arm_neon_ok' previously defined at line 1532.
(Sorry for only complaining about those issues today.)
Tobias
On 09/11/2012 02:54 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
Hi,
This allows the
> your patch broke bootstrapping here:
>
> /home/tob/projects/gcc-git/gcc/gcc/doc//sourcebuild.texi:1537: Node
> `arm_neon_ok' previously defined at line 1532.
>
> (Sorry for only complaining about those issues today.)
No need to feel sorry about that. It is Really Bad that people
apparently don't
Fixed the format of the test options, as per Jakub's comment.
Add -fno-short-enums flag to test c-c++-common/pr51712.c as discussed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51712.
This removes the excess warning that caused the test to fail.
Tested in arm-none-eabi configuration. The test no
On 09/11/2012 03:08 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
your patch broke bootstrapping here:
/home/tob/projects/gcc-git/gcc/gcc/doc//sourcebuild.texi:1537: Node
`arm_neon_ok' previously defined at line 1532.
I fixed it (Rev. 191181) with the attached patch. arm_neon_ok should
have been arm_neon2_ok. (I
Hi,
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >>> +++ gcc/lto/lto.c (working copy)
> >>> @@ -1559,8 +1559,6 @@ lto_fixup_prevailing_decls (tree t)
> >>> {
> >>>enum tree_code code = TREE_CODE (t);
> >>>LTO_NO_PREVAIL (TREE_TYPE (t));
> >>> - if (CODE_CONTAINS_STRUCT (code, TS
This removes the unused gtc_mode param and moves lifetime management
of the various tables to a central place, avoiding repeated checks.
LTO bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2012-09-11 Richard Guenther
* lto.c (enum gtc_mode): Remove.
(str
On 09/11/12 14:17, Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 09/11/2012 03:08 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
your patch broke bootstrapping here:
/home/tob/projects/gcc-git/gcc/gcc/doc//sourcebuild.texi:1537: Node
`arm_neon_ok' previously defined at line 1532.
I fixed it (Rev. 191181) with the attached patch. arm_neo
This patch adds predefines for AArch64 code models. These code models are
added as an effective target for the AArch64 platform.
Tests for these predefines have been added to `gcc.target/aarch64/'.
Thanks,
Chris
ChangeLog:
[AArch64] Added predefines for AArch64 code models.
gc
Hi!
As discussed in the PR, right now we do a very bad job for debug info
of partially inlined functions (both when they are kept only partially
inlined, or when partial inlining is performed, but doesn't seem to be
useful and foo.part.N is inlined back, either into the original function, or
into
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> >>> +++ gcc/lto/lto.c (working copy)
>> >>> @@ -1559,8 +1559,6 @@ lto_fixup_prevailing_decls (tree t)
>> >>> {
>> >>>enum tree_code code = TREE_CODE (t);
>> >>>LTO_NO_PRE
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> Hello,
>
> here is a patch that turns {v[1],v[0]} into vec_perm_expr(v,v,{1,0}) if the
> target is ok with it.
>
> I am attaching 2 versions of the patch. p-good is the one that passes
> testing. p-bad, where I rely on fold_stmt to detect ident
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
here is a patch that turns {v[1],v[0]} into vec_perm_expr(v,v,{1,0}) if the
target is ok with it.
I am attaching 2 versions of the patch. p-good is the one that passes
testing. p-bad, wher
> + if (args_to_skip)
> +for (parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (current_function_decl), num = 0;
> +parm; parm = DECL_CHAIN (parm), num++)
> + if (bitmap_bit_p (args_to_skip, num)
> + && is_gimple_reg (parm))
> + {
> + tree ddecl;
> + gimple def_temp;
> +
> +
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:41:24PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> > + if (args_to_skip)
> > +for (parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (current_function_decl), num = 0;
> > +parm; parm = DECL_CHAIN (parm), num++)
> > + if (bitmap_bit_p (args_to_skip, num)
> > + && is_gimple_reg (parm))
Hi,
the operands cache is ugly. This patch removes it at least for the def
operands, saving three pointers for roughly each normal statement (the
pointer in gsbase, and two pointers from def_optype_d). This is
relatively easy to do, because all statements except ASMs have at most one
def (an
The attached patch fixes the bootstrap on darwin to cope with the
VEC changes to remove unnecessary VEC function overloads. Tested on
x86_64-apple-darwin12. Okay for gcc trunk.
Jack
2012-09-11 Dominique d'Humieres
Jack Howarth
* config/darwin.c (darwin_asm_na
On 09/10/2012 04:26 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> + rtx index = force_reg (index_mode, dispatch_index);
You can't modify the result of force_reg. Use copy_to_{mode_,}reg instead.
> + rtx tmp = expand_simple_binop (index_mode, MINUS,
> + index, CONST
On 11 September 2012 12:52, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> Try something like:
>
> short foo(int);
>
> short swaps (short x, int y)
> {
> int z = x;
> if (y)
> z = __builtin_bswap16(x);
> return foo (z);
> }
>
> If that's not enough, try adding 1 to z before calling foo.
>
Thanks, it wor
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 11:10:37PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > + int expected(0);
> > if (__atomic_compare_exchange_n(gi, &expected, pending_bit, false,
> > __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL,
> > __ATOMIC_RELAXED))
>
Ping?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00068.html
Thanks
Christophe.
On 3 September 2012 11:01, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> On 31 August 2012 18:14, Janis Johnson wrote:
>>
>> do something like
>>
>> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "fmrrd\[\\t \]+r0,\[\\t \]*r1,\[\\t
>> \]*d0" 2
On 09/11/2012 08:02 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 2012-09-11 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR libstdc++/54172
> * libsupc++/guard.cc (__cxa_guard_acquire): Fix up the last
> argument of the first __atomic_compare_exchange_n.
Looks good.
r~
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
here is a patch that turns {v[1],v[0]} into vec_perm_expr(v,v,{1,0}) if the
target is ok with it.
I am attaching 2 versions of the patch. p-good is the one that passes
testing. p-bad, wher
Hi!
As discussed on IRC, the picochip-* port doesn't have an active maintainer
anymore, this patch adds it to deprecated ports for 4.7.2+ so that it can be
removed in
GCC 4.8 unless somebody steps up to maintain it.
Ok for trunk/4.7?
2012-09-11 Jakub Jelinek
* config.gcc: Obsolete p
Hi,
since we are now using C++, I think we can remove the attributes and
just use unnamed parameters. For now I kept the names in comments for
documentation purposes, but would be glad to remove those too, if you like.
Booted and tested x86_64-linux.
Thanks,
Paolo.
PS: slightly interesting,
Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) -> BB10 (BB_HOT_PARTITION) -> EXIT
and BB10 has no other incoming edges. and we are duplicating it.
My hypothesis, is that with a gcov based profile, we should never have
such partitioning on the edges, BB10 should be COLD as we
Hi,
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Dehao Chen wrote:
> Looks like we have two choices:
>
> 1. Stream out block info, and use LTO_SET_PREVAIL for TREE_CHAIN(t)
This will actually not work correctly in some cases. The problem is, if
the prevailing decl is already part of another chain (say in another
bl
> Index: gcc/ChangeLog
>
> 2012-09-04 Lawrence Crowl
>
> * double-int.h (double_int::operator &=): New.
> (double_int::operator ^=): New.
> (double_int::operator |=): New.
> (double_int::mul_with_sign): Modify overflow parameter to bool*.
> (do
On 2012-09-11 08:42 , Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
This is ok, of course.
Then could you please commit it (I don't have write access)?
Done. Rev 191192.
2012-09-11 Dominique Dhumieres
* config/darwin.c (darwin_asm_named_section): Adjust for
VEC changes.
(darwin_as
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:29:12PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> PS: slightly interesting, in a couple of cases -
> write_unnamed_type_name, wrap_cleanups_r - the parameters were
> actually used.
Just a general comment, often an argument is only conditionally used,
e.g. depending on some preproces
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Christian Bruel wrote:
> Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
>
> BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) -> BB10 (BB_HOT_PARTITION) -> EXIT
>
> and BB10 has no other incoming edges. and we are duplicating it.
That is wrong, should never happen. Is there a test case to pla
Mark Kettenis writes:
> In file included from ../../../src/gcc/gcc/mcf.c:47:0:
> ../../../src/gcc/gcc/mcf.c: In function 'void dump_fixup_edge(FILE*,
> fixup_graph_type*, fixup_edge_p)':
> ../../../src/gcc/gcc/system.h:288:78: error: integer overflow in expression
> [-Werror=overflow]
This is
Caught on a sparc build.
Testing on sparc. Will commit once it finishes.
Diego.
* var-tracking.c (vt_add_function_parameter): Adjust for VEC
changes.
diff --git a/gcc/var-tracking.c b/gcc/var-tracking.c
index 8c9ec48..9f5bc12 100644
--- a/gcc/var-tracking.c
+++ b/gcc/var-track
On 09/11/2012 05:40 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Christian Bruel
> wrote:
>> Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
>>
>> BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) -> BB10 (BB_HOT_PARTITION) -> EXIT
>>
>> and BB10 has no other incoming edges. and we are duplicating it.
>
>
Hi!
As discussed on IRC, the picochip-* port doesn't have an active maintainer
anymore, this patch adds it to deprecated ports for 4.7.2+ so that it can be
removed in
GCC 4.8 unless somebody steps up to maintain it.
Ok for trunk/4.7?
2012-09-11 Jakub Jelinek
* config.gcc: Obsolete
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012, Marc Glisse wrote:
Hello,
this patch lets the compiler try to rewrite:
(vec_concat (vec_select x [a]) (vec_select x [b]))
as:
vec_select x [a b]
or even just "x" if appropriate.
In a first iteration I was restricting it to b-a==1, but it seemed better not
to: it helps
I saw comments in tree-streamer-out.c:
/* Do not stream BLOCK_SOURCE_LOCATION. We cannot handle debug information
for early inlining so drop it on the floor instead of ICEing in
dwarf2out.c. */
streamer_write_chain (ob, BLOCK_VARS (expr), ref_p);
However, what the code is doing se
On 09/11/2012 05:37 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:29:12PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
PS: slightly interesting, in a couple of cases -
write_unnamed_type_name, wrap_cleanups_r - the parameters were
actually used.
Just a general comment, often an argument is only conditiona
when running a cfg dump, I get many messages like:
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 1667, should be 3334
So it looks like a profile information was not correctly propagated
somewhere. which could lead to such partitioning incoherency. I have no
idea for the moment if this is local problem or n
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:40:30PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Christian Bruel
> wrote:
> > Actually, the edge is fairly simple. I have
> >
> > BB5 (BB_COLD_PARTITION) -> BB10 (BB_HOT_PARTITION) -> EXIT
> >
> > and BB10 has no other incoming edges. and we are
On 08/03/2012 08:05 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
This patch allows us to change
rn++
rm=[rn]
into
rm=[rn + 4]
rn++
That is an interesting optimization. I think analogous optimization
could be done for INC/DEC addressing (probably it might be beneficial
for ppc which has such addressing and disp
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 05:29:12PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>> PS: slightly interesting, in a couple of cases -
>> write_unnamed_type_name, wrap_cleanups_r - the parameters were
>> actually used.
>
> Just a general comment, often an argum
Please see my answers below
>-Original Message-
>From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
>Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 12:38 PM
>To: Iyer, Balaji V
>Cc: Richard Guenther; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Gabriel Dos Reis; Aldy
>Hernandez (al...@redhat.com); Jeff Law
>Subject: Re: [PAT
On Sep 11, 2012, at 6:12 AM, Kyrylo Tkachov wrote:
> Fixed the format of the test options, as per Jakub's comment.
> Ok for trunk?
Ok.
On Sep 11, 2012, at 8:06 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Ping?
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00068.html
Since the arm people haven't rejected it… Ok.
Hello,
Thanks for the quick review!
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 09/10/2012 04:26 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
>> + rtx index = force_reg (index_mode, dispatch_index);
>
> You can't modify the result of force_reg. Use copy_to_{mode_,}reg instead.
Done.
>> +
On 09/11/2012 10:53 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> + force_expand_binop (index_mode, code_to_optab (MINUS),
Use sub_optab directly, rather than code_to_optab.
Otherwise ok.
r~
On 09/11/2012 10:14 AM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> The function mangling handles several of the version inconsistencies
> you have mentioned. If the CPU revisions, vector lengths are not the
> same between the function declaration and the function, then the name
> of the function will be different and
Can you resend your patch in text form (also need to resolve the
latest conflicts) so that it can be commented inline?
Please also provide as summary a more up-to-date description of
1) Command line option syntax and semantics
2) New dumping APIs and semantics
3) Conversion changes
Looking at the
On 2012-08-29 20:31 , Aaron Gray wrote:
2012-08-30 Aaron Gray
* gengtype-lex.l: Support for FILE
Support for C++ single line Comments
Support for classes
Support for enums
ignore 'static'
ignore 'inline'
ignore 'public:'
i
On 9/11/12, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Mark Kettenis writes:
>> In file included from ../../../src/gcc/gcc/mcf.c:47:0:
>> ../../../src/gcc/gcc/mcf.c: In function 'void dump_fixup_edge(FILE*,
>> fixup_graph_type*, fixup_edge_p)':
>> ../../../src/gcc/gcc/system.h:288:78: error: integer overflow in
>>
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> @@ -778,6 +791,7 @@ type (options_p *optsp, bool nested)
>> return resolve_typedef (s, &lexer_line);
>>
>> case STRUCT:
>> +case CLASS:
>
>
> I think that as far as gengtype is concerned, 'struct' and 'class' should be
> e
I have finished the initial implementation of the backtrace library I
proposed at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-08/msg00317.html . I've
separated the work into three patches. These patches only implement the
backtrace library itself; actual use of the library will follow in
separate patches.
Th
I have finished the initial implementation of the backtrace library I
proposed at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-08/msg00317.html . I've
separated the work into three patches. These patches only implement the
backtrace library itself; actual use of the library will follow in
separate patches.
Th
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> This patch is the interface to and configury of libbacktrace. I've
> separated these out as the parts of libbacktrace that require the most
> review. The interface to libbacktrace is in the file backtrace.h. This
> is what callers will
On Sep 11, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I have finished the initial implementation of the backtrace library I
> proposed at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-08/msg00317.html . I've
> separated the work into three patches. These patches only implement the
> backtrace library itself
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
>> This patch is the interface to and configury of libbacktrace. I've
>> separated these out as the parts of libbacktrace that require the most
>> review. The interface to libba
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
