The following patch improves coloring. The order of pushing allocnos
on the coloring stack from a bunch of colorable allocnos was always
important for generated code performance. LRA has a mechanism of
allocating pseudos by threads. Thread in LRA is a set of
non-conflicting pseudos connect
Hi Yufeng,
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 22:34 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> Many thanks for the review.
>
> I find your suggestion on using the next_interp field quite
> enlightening. I prepared a patch which adds changes without modifying
> the framework. With the patch, the slsr pass
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 06:38:00PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2013-11-12 11:31:31.0 +0100
> > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2013-11-13 10:14:10.981609589 +0100
> > @@ -7978,7 +7978,12 @@ (define_insn "*anddi_2"
> > (const_int 0)))
> > (set (
On Nov 12, 2013, at 4:39 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> with a single evaluation. To achieve this, this patch adds a new GNU
> C extension __auto_type,
Nice, I like it.
passes481
# of unsupported tests 132
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes962
# of unsupported tests 264
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc49-4.9.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../xg++
version 4.9.0 20131113 (experimental) (GCC
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 06:38:00PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> > --- gcc/config/i386/i386.md.jj 2013-11-12 11:31:31.0 +0100
>> > +++ gcc/config/i386/i386.md 2013-11-13 10:14:10.981609589 +0100
>> > @@ -7978,7 +7978,12 @@ (define
Hi Bill,
On 11/13/13 18:04, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hi Yufeng,
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 22:34 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
Hi Bill,
Many thanks for the review.
I find your suggestion on using the next_interp field quite
enlightening. I prepared a patch which adds changes without modifying
the framew
Hi Yufeng,
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 19:32 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> On 11/13/13 18:04, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi Yufeng,
> >
> > On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 22:34 +, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
> >> Hi Bill,
> >>
> >> Many thanks for the review.
> >>
> >> I find your suggestion on using the n
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> They are reported as failing with the n32 ABI, but the failures are spurious.
>
> Tested on mips64el-linux-gnu, applied on the mainline and 4.7 branch.
>
>
> 2012-10-21 Eric Botcazou
>
> * gnat.dg/specs/atomic1.ads: XFAIL on MIPS.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code
> were not intended for -m32 on x86_64 and should not be tested with it,
> thus I'm adding lp64 to the target requirements.
>
> Let me also briefly mention that I wou
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 11:39 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Joseph S. Myers
> wrote:
> > contains what C11 describes as "generic functions".
> > Although DR#419 makes clear that users cannot #undef these macros (or
> > otherwise suppress use of a macro definition)
Hi Yufeng,
The second version of your original patch is ok with me with the
following changes. Sorry for the little side adventure into the
next-interp logic; in the end that's going to hurt more than it helps in
this case. Thanks for having a look at it, anyway. Thanks also for
cleaning up thi
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> I have no idea, but does anyone knows if other free compilers (notably
> Clang/LLVM) are adding a similar feature?
I looked at the list of Clang language extensions before adding this one
and didn't see mention of anything similar as a C languag
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:27 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> They are reported as failing with the n32 ABI, but the failures are spurious.
>>
>> Tested on mips64el-linux-gnu, applied on the mainline and 4.7 branch.
>>
>>
>> 2012-10-21 Eric Botcazou
> Ok, that sounds good. Here is the new patch. Is this ok for trunk if
> testing (bootstrap regression and lto profiledbootstrap) succeeds?
>
> Thanks,
> Teresa
>
> 2013-11-13 Teresa Johnson
>
> * predict.c (drop_profile): Error is currently too strict.
> (handle_missing_profi
> The following fixes PR ipa/58862, which caused failures in lto
> profiledbootstrap and in several spec cpu2006 profile-use builds.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86-64-unknown-linux-gnu. Also ensured that
> it fixed the lto profiledbootstrap and cpu2006 failures. Ok for trunk?
>
> Thanks,
> Te
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 11:38 +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 07 Nov 15:42, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> > Could you pls take a look?
>
> Ping?
>
> --
> Thanks, K
Looks OK to me, go ahead and check it in.
Steve Ellcey
sell...@mips.com
Hello,
this patch introduces new function reordering feature that is based
on the patch I submitted few days ago.
The idea of a new flag (-fprofile-reorder-functions) is to reorder
functions according to the first execution in instrumented run. Of
course, the option operates only in LTO mode, w
On 11/13/13 07:46, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
This set of 3 patches creates gimple-iterator.h to hold the prototypes
for the existing gimple-iterator.c. It also extracts the gimple-stmt
'walker' routines into their own file. I didn't originally intend to do
that, but I discovered that the include dep
Hi
This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie.
With the new option enable will make it pass -fPIE and -pie from the gcc and
g++ frontend. Have only add the support for two targets but should work on
more targes. In configure.ac we add the new option. We can't compile the
On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 18:29 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:25:06AM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> > > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_linux.cc: Temporarily
> > > ifdef out almost the whole source.
> > > * sanitizer_common/sanitizer_common_syscalls.inc: Li
On 11/11/13 12:10, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/11/13 07:32, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
However, looking more closely, it seems store_unaligned_arguments_into_pseudos
is not really useful for PARALLEL arguments in the first place. What this
routine does is load arguments into args[i]
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> The following patch improves coloring. The order of pushing allocnos on
> the coloring stack from a bunch of colorable allocnos was always important
> for generated code performance. LRA has a mechanism of allocating pseudos
> by thread
We have a known API wart with the SSA_NAME manager. Specifically, once
you start releasing names, you can't have dangling references (say in
unreachable blocks) and allococate new names.
The erroneous path optimization could run afoul of that requirement as
it removed statements after an ex
This fixes a memory stomper that Kenny found.
This also improves the code in the face of vector of partial ints...
diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2out.c b/gcc/dwarf2out.c
index acee2000..ab8852f 100644
--- a/gcc/dwarf2out.c
+++ b/gcc/dwarf2out.c
@@ -3163,7 +3163,7 @@ static void add_AT_location_descriptio
On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
> This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie.
Ick. Would be nice to figure out on what systems one can do this and just do
it without the configure option. Is there some reason that we need an option
for it?
Committed, obvious.
* gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c (pass_isolate_erroneous_paths): Comment fix.
Index: gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c
===
--- gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c (revision 204761)
+++ gimple-ssa-isolate-paths.c (working cop
Hi Bill,
On 11/13/13 20:54, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hi Yufeng,
The second version of your original patch is ok with me with the
following changes. Sorry for the little side adventure into the
next-interp logic; in the end that's going to hurt more than it helps in
this case. Thanks for having a l
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:41:54PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code
> > were not intended for -m32 on x86_64 and should not be tested with it,
> > thus I'm adding lp64 t
Vladimir Makarov wrote:
> PR rtl-optimization/59036
> * ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members
> first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq.
> (sorted_copies): New static var.
> (allocnos_conflict_by_live_ranges_p, copy_freq_co
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_psave_function_arg): New function.
(rs6000_finish_function_arg): Likewise.
(rs6000_function_arg): Use rs6000_psave_function_arg and
rs6000_finish_function_arg to handle both vector and floating
point arguments that are also passed in GPRs / the stack.
This is okay,
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:50:27, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Bernd Edlinger
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:30:16, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Uros B
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
>> This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie.
>
> Ick. Would be nice to figure out on what systems one can do this and just do
> it without the configure option. I
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:41:54PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > the testcases I have added for IRA shrink wrapping preparation code
>> > were not intended for -m32 on x86_6
This patch is for PR58963.
In the patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00560.html,
the builtin function is used to perform complex multiplication and
division. This is to comply with C99 standard, but I am wondering if
C++ also needs this.
There is no complex keyword in C++, and no
On 11/13/2013, 12:56 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
2013-11-13 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-optimization/59036
* ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members
first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq.
(sorted_copies): New static var.
(allo
> Vladimir Makarov wrote:
>
> > PR rtl-optimization/59036
> > * ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members
> > first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq.
> > (sorted_copies): New static var.
> > (allocnos_conflict_by_live_ranges_p
On 11/13/2013, 8:34 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Vladimir Makarov wrote:
PR rtl-optimization/59036
* ira-color.c (struct allocno_color_data): Add new members
first_thread_allocno, next_thread_allocno, thread_freq.
(sorted_copies): New static var.
(allo
Ping?
thanks,
Cong
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Cong Hou wrote:
> Hi James
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 2:55 AM, James Greenhalgh
> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Cong Hou wrote:
>>> > Thank you for your detailed explanation.
>>> >
>>> > Once GC
On 11/13/2013, 5:48 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
The following patch improves coloring. The order of pushing allocnos on
the coloring stack from a bunch of colorable allocnos was always important
for generated code performance. LRA has
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:33:46PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Well, we had been thinking about this, but right now it seems we're not
> > going to be able to make that change throughout the ecosystem quickly
> > enough, so for now, it'll probably
On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
>>> This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie.
>>
>> Ick. Would be nice to figure out on what systems one c
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
This patchset will add a new configure options --enable-default-pie.
>>>
>
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Cong Hou wrote:
> This patch is for PR58963.
>
> In the patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00560.html,
> the builtin function is used to perform complex multiplication and
> division. This is to comply with C99 standard, but I am wondering if
> C++
On 11/11/13 07:32, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Hello,
when implementing the new ABI for powerpc64le-linux, I ran into an assertion
failure in store_unaligned_arguments_into_pseudos:
gcc_assert (args[i].partial % UNITS_PER_WORD == 0);
This can happen in the new ABI since we pass "homogene
On 11/11/13 07:33, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
Hello,
this is another tweak to the middle-end to help support the new
powerpc64le-linux ABI.
In the new ABI, we make a distinction between functions that pass
all arguments solely in registers, and those that do not. Only when
calling one the latter ty
On 11/08/13 12:02, David Malcolm wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing a small example proof of concept posted to help
those who don't see where this is going understand the goal. I would
recommend against posting another large patch for inclusion at this time.
Attached is a proof-of-concept patch whic
On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote:
The following series of patches convert it to a C++ hierarchy, using the
existing structs, eliminating the union. The "gimple" typedef changes
from being a
(union gimple_statement_d *)
to being a:
(struct gimple_statement_base *)
There are no virtua
On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote:
gcc/
* gdbhooks.py (GimplePrinter.to_string): Update lookup of
code field to reflect inheritance, rather than embedding of
the base gimple type.
Conditionally approved. Obvious condition is the other 5 patches get
approved.
Jeff
On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c b/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c
index 4f31b83..2555dbe 100644
--- a/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple-streamer-in.c
@@ -129,13 +129,14 @@ input_gimple_stmt (struct lto_input_block *ib, struct
data_in *data_in,
On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote:
* gimple.h (is_a_helper ::test): New.
(is_a_helper ::test): New.
(is_a_helper ::test): New.
(is_a_helper ::test): New.
OK with the usual conditions. Check with Andrew as to the location of
these helpers since he's in the mi
On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote:
gcc/
Patch autogenerated by refactor_gimple.py from
https://github.com/davidmalcolm/gcc-refactoring-scripts
revision 74cd3d5f06565c318749d0fb9f35b565dae28daa
[ ... ]
This is fine with the usual conditions.
diff --git a/gcc/gimple
On 10/31/13 10:26, David Malcolm wrote:
* gimple.h (gimple_use_ops): Port from union to usage of
dyn_cast.
(gimple_set_use_ops): Port from union to usage of as_a.
(gimple_set_vuse): Likewise.
(gimple_set_vdef): Likewise.
(gimple_call_internal_fn): P
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> as discussed with Honza on many occasions, all users of
>> cgraph_get_create_node really want cgraph_get_create_real_symbol_node,
>> i.e. they are not interested in inline nodes and should get a
>> standalone node instead. So this patch chan
101 - 154 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
