> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the ada front-end.
I don't think that the mechanical change in UI_From_gnu is correct, see the
comme
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the sparc port.
OK if you change the type of 'low' in solaris_pragma_align to unsigned HWI.
--
Eric
Hi all,
There are still two patches on IVOPT pending for review now. Since
others have already approved and applied, I am wondering whether these
two can be reviewed and get in if ok.
Improve IVOPT to handle outside and inside loop iv uses differently in GCC:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/201
Hi,
I previously committed two patches lowering complex address expression for
IVOPT at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg00546.html and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01103.html
When I bootstrapping GCC I found there were some peculiar cases like
&MEM[ptr+CST] + , whic
This fixes a thinko of mine: when I added another two elements to the
ubsan data structure, I forgot to increase the size of the array.
Alternatively, I could use an alloca for this (VLAs issue a warning
in C++03 and are thus no-go :().
I don't have a simple testcase for this. Valgrind/asan woul
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Wei Mi wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Zdenek Dvorak
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> This patch works on the intrinsic calls handling issue in IVOPT mentioned
>>> here:
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg01295.html
>>>
>>> In find_interesting_uses
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:27:00AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This fixes a thinko of mine: when I added another two elements to the
> ubsan data structure, I forgot to increase the size of the array.
>
> Alternatively, I could use an alloca for this (VLAs issue a warning
> in C++03 and are thus
The PR was fixed by Jakub in r205283, this patch merely adds a
testcase for it. Passed ubsan testsuite for -m32/-m64.
Ok for trunk?
2013-11-25 Marek Polacek
testsuite/
* g++.dg/ubsan/pr59250.C: New test.
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/ubsan/pr59250.C.mp32013-11-25 10:43:24.797315678
Hi,
>>> + else if (ref->type == REF_COMPONENT &&
>>> ref->u.c.component->attr.function
>>> + && ref->u.c.component->attr.proc_pointer
>>> + && ref->u.c.component->attr.dimension)
>
>
> I wonder whether one should take care of functions returning BT_CLASS, but I
> thi
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:44:57AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> The PR was fixed by Jakub in r205283, this patch merely adds a
> testcase for it. Passed ubsan testsuite for -m32/-m64.
>
> Ok for trunk?
Can't you reduce it at least a little bit more?
Like I doubt __attribute__ ((__visibility__ (
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:16:31AM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Alan Modra writes:
>
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:16:26AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 01:27:39AM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >> > Where does it call a varargs function?
> >>
> >> printf
> >
> > Sorry
It's unused (phew).
Applied.
Richard.
2013-11-25 Richard Biener
* tree-dfa.c: Remove unused convert.h include.
Index: tree-dfa.c
===
--- tree-dfa.c (revision 205344)
+++ tree-dfa.c (working copy)
@@ -47,7 +47,6 @@ al
Mike -
Unfortunately I cannot allocate time for the review of the gengtype
bits right now, and it's not clear when I will be able to.
2013/11/23 Mike Stump :
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:36:00AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:27:00AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > This fixes a thinko of mine: when I added another two elements to the
> > ubsan data structure, I forgot to increase the size of the array.
> >
> > Alternatively, I c
On 11/23/2013 08:12 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/10/2013 05:26 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
this is the issue with -Waddress caused by the fix for c++/56930. I'm
handling it as already described, that is by adding a bool parameter to
c_common_truthvalue_conversion.
Why not handle this by making
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 2:04 AM, dxq wrote:
> fixing SMS, do you mean that we only modify the SMS pass?
> if so, the problem we have to solve:
>* how to make unroll and sms work together? calling unroll pass in sms,
> but it would be needed more passes such as web, and it's perfect to rerun
>
On 11/23/2013 08:36 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/06/2013 05:56 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
in this bug, filed by Zack, we loop forever after error in
constant_value_1. Straightforward thing to do, detect and break out.
This doesn't handle mutual infinite recursion, such as the modified
testcas
On Sat, 23 Nov 2013, Wei Mi wrote:
> For the failed testcase, it was compiled using -fmodulo-sched.
> modulo-sched phase set SCHED_GROUP_P of a jump insn to be true, which
> means the jump insn should be scheduled with prev insn as a group.
SMS doesn't set SCHED_GROUP_P by itself; did you mean tha
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Rong Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Rong Xu wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This patch injects a condition into the instrumented code for edge
>>> counter update. The counter value will not be upda
On 11/23/2013 10:08 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I believe that our current practice is to have one error and then use
inform for follow-on messages. OK with that change.
Thanks. The multiple permerror and error aren't in the new code, my
patch just shuffles those around. I would be glad to work on
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the alias analysis code.
>
> Ok?
Ok.
Thanks,
R
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:49:56AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:44:57AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > The PR was fixed by Jakub in r205283, this patch merely adds a
> > testcase for it. Passed ubsan testsuite for -m32/-m64.
> >
> > Ok for trunk?
>
> Can't you reduce
... evidently I attached the wrong p ;) This should be right one.
Paolo.
Index: c-common.c
===
--- c-common.c (revision 205343)
+++ c-common.c (working copy)
@@ -4579,10 +4579,11 @@ c_common_truthvalue_conversion (location_t locati
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the builtins code.
- HOST_WIDE_INT c[2];
HO
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the graphite code.
>
> Ok?
Ok.
Thanks,
RIchard
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the gen*.c code, excluding gengtype.
>
> Ok?
Ok
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:36:37AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:49:56AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:44:57AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > The PR was fixed by Jakub in r205283, this patch merely adds a
> > > testcase for it. Passed ubsa
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the cfg code.
>
> Ok?
Hmm, this is an example o
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the hook code.
>
> Ok?
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
Hi all,
This patch gets the aarch64 backend to use the Cortex A53 costs when tuning for
that core, instead of using the generic costs. The costs table itself was added
recently in arm/aarch-cost-tables.h and is shared between the two ports.
Tested aarch64-none-elf on a model.
Ok for trunk?
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:47:29AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> That looks much better, I wonder if it would reproduce even if the result
> is saved somewhere (either E *e; field in S with swapping of the two class
> definitions, or global var or static data member static E *e; of S),
> otherwise
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the loop code.
>
> Ok?
@@ -2662,8 +2661,8 @@ iv
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the lto code.
>
> Ok?
- loop->nb_iterat
2013/11/21 Richard Biener :
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 11/20/13 03:02, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Note that this, the intrusiveness of the feature and the questionable
>>> gain makes me question whether GCC should have support for this
>>> feature (and whether
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the gimple code.
>
> Ok?
@@ -1754,7 +1754,7 @@
Mike Stump writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/gengtype-parse.c b/gcc/gengtype-parse.c
> index 8328e3a..0a58822 100644
> --- a/gcc/gengtype-parse.c
> +++ b/gcc/gengtype-parse.c
> @@ -197,6 +197,23 @@ require2 (int t1, int t2)
>return v;
> }
>
> +/* If the next token does not have one of the codes T1
Hello,
I had forgotten to run the Ada test suite when I submitted the previous version
of this patch.
And indeed there were some Ada test cases failing because in Ada packed
structures are
like bit fields, but without the DECL_BIT_FIELD_TYPE attribute.
Please find attached the updated version o
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 12:36:55PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/21/13 10:09, Martin Jambor wrote:
> > PR rtl-optimization/10474
> > * ira.c (interesting_dest_for_shprep_1): New function.
> > (interesting_dest_for_shprep): Use interesting_dest_for_shprep_1,
> > also check para
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the tree code.
>
> Ok?
diff --git a/gcc/tree-af
Richard Biener writes:
> @@ -958,6 +961,12 @@ streamer_write_tree_header (struct output_block
> *ob, tree expr)
> streamer_write_uhwi (ob, BINFO_N_BASE_BINFOS (expr));
>else if (TREE_CODE (expr) == CALL_EXPR)
> streamer_write_uhwi (ob, call_expr_nargs (expr));
> + else if (CODE_CONT
On 11/23/2013 08:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the bfin port.
>
> Ok?
I haven't seen any updates on the
On 11 November 2013 18:52, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> +2013-10-28 Martin Liska
>>> +
>>> + * gcc.dg/time-profiler-1.c: New test.
>>> + * gcc.dg/time-profiler-2.c: Ditto.
>>> +
>
> Yes, I do have commit right. I will bootstrap the patch, test Inkscape
> instrumentation and commit it.
>
On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> after much pondering about the issue we came up with this design to
> handle restrict more generally. Without a completely different way of
> representing conflicts (or non-conflicts) of memory references we're bound
> to somehow encode th
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Michael Matz wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > after much pondering about the issue we came up with
Hi,
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> > Apart from the issue that LTO drops all BLOCKs this makes the middle-end
> > feature too much tied to the C family frontends and their definition
> > of restrict. It also requires BLOCK lookup / matching at the time
> > of the alias query (wh
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> @@ -958,6 +961,12 @@ streamer_write_tree_header (struct output_block
>> *ob, tree expr)
>> streamer_write_uhwi (ob, BINFO_N_BASE_BINFOS (expr));
>>else if (TREE_CODE (expr) == CALL_EXPR)
>> streame
This reduces peak memory usage for -fdump-tree-all on tree.c with -O2
from several GB to a 200MB.
It helps really freeing obstacks ;)
Testing in progress.
Richard.
2013-11-25 Richard Biener
* pretty-print.c (output_buffer::~output_buffer): Really
free the obstacks.
Index:
Updated patch with spaces, etc according to check_GNU_style.sh
Put guard as per Tobias' request.
Is it Ok?
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Sergey Ostanevich wrote:
> Tobias,
>
>
>> When I understand the patch correctly, the warning is shown in two cases:
>> a) When the loop could be vectoriz
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:19:02PM +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > Ok, here it is (untested though, because libsanitizer in gcc is older and I
>> > don't have spare cycles to play
On 25/11/13 11:33, Charles Baylis wrote:
> This bug reveals a long standing problem in the ARM ldm/stm patterns
> which allow the virtual hardware register 'afp' to be used. A similar
> problem may affect vfp_pop_multiple_with_writeback, so that is also
> addressed.
>
> I have not included a test
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 06:53:59PM +0400, Alexey Samsonov wrote:
> > In GCC, libbacktrace is built as a libtool convenience library only and
> > then linked into whatever libraries want to use it. So indeed, the plan
> > is to link libbacktrace.la into libasan.so.1.0.0 and libasan.a
> > (and the e
On 25/11/13 11:01, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch gets the aarch64 backend to use the Cortex A53 costs when tuning
> for
> that core, instead of using the generic costs. The costs table itself was
> added
> recently in arm/aarch-cost-tables.h and is shared between the two ports
On Thu, 2013-11-21 at 18:03 -0500, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 11/21/2013 05:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:24:55PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> >> On 11/21/13 15:19, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 03:25:52PM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > So is there
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> the entire patch.This patch covers the real.c code.
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Ok?
>
Uros prompted me to look into why we were still getting warnings
compiling the soft-fp code in libgcc despite this in config/t-softfp:
$(soft-fp-objects) : INTERNAL_CFLAGS += -Wno-missing-prototypes -Wno-type-limit
s
It turned out that soft-fp-objects still included the $srcdir prefix.
It seems m
On 11/25/2013 06:04 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port and
front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through the
entire patch.This patch covers the
Hi Jason,
Please see my responses below
> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Merrill [mailto:ja...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 10:51 AM
> To: Iyer, Balaji V; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: Jeff Law
> Subject: Re: _Cilk_spawn and _Cilk_sync for C++
>
> On 11/21/2013 05:4
Il 25/11/2013 16:45, Rainer Orth ha scritto:
> Uros prompted me to look into why we were still getting warnings
> compiling the soft-fp code in libgcc despite this in config/t-softfp:
>
> $(soft-fp-objects) : INTERNAL_CFLAGS += -Wno-missing-prototypes
> -Wno-type-limit
> s
>
> It turned out that
Hi!
Just some suggestion related to terminology.
On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:58:29 +0400, Ilya Tocar wrote:
> On 14 Nov 11:27, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > + /* Set when symbol needs to be dumped for lto/offloading. */
> > > + unsigned need_dump : 1;
> > > +
> >
> > That's very non-descriptive.
On Sat, 23 Nov 2013, Mike Stump wrote:
> Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual
> port and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go
> through the entire patch. This patch covers the c front end.
>
> Ok?
OK.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@cod
Hello,
This patch is the same as posted in PR 59243.
Tested with
make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim
\{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}"
Pre-approved by Kaz in PR 59243, committed as rev 205358.
Cheers,
Oleg
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/53976
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 05:13:25PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > --- a/gcc/cgraphunit.c
> > +++ b/gcc/cgraphunit.c
> > @@ -2019,7 +2019,18 @@ ipa_passes (void)
> > passes->all_lto_gen_passes);
> >
> >if (!in_lto_p)
> > -ipa_write_summaries ();
> > +{
> >
Hello,
This fixes a warning in sh.md caused by a missing mode in the
doloop_end_split pattern.
Tested with
make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim
\{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}"
with no new failures. Committed as obvious as rev 205359.
Cheers,
Oleg
gc
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, David Malcolm wrote:
> I'm not a fan of these "_layout" names, but I'm not sure what better to
> call them. Perhaps:
>GSS_OMP_PARALLEL_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITH_CLAUSES_CHILD_FN_DATA_ARG
>GSS_OMP_SINGLE_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITH_CLAUSES
>GSS_OMP_ATOMIC_STO
Hi,
I am looking into testcases for individual code paths of ipa-devirt and my life
would be much easier if gimple-fold did not take some of them by old code.
This patch also improves code by doing devirtualization earlier in the game
since get_polymorphic_call_info is now supperset of
gimple_extra
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 09:12 +0900, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> Oleg Endo wrote:
> > Currently GCC doesn't pass the --isa parameter to the assembler for SH
> > targets other than SH2A and SH5. This makes the assembler accept any
> > kind of ISA and happily produce e.g. SH2A code even though the target is
> > What's the reason you cannot defer SIMD cloning to LTRANS stage
> > as simple IPA pass next to IPA-PTA?
>
> Ok, deferring till after IPA-PTA was easy, just small ipa-cp.c changes
> (look at the attribute rather than simd*clone* fields), passes.def and
> had to tweak ipa_add_new_function which
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:24:30PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> > Richi has asked the we break the wide-int patch so that the individual port
> > and front end maintainers can review their parts without have to go through
> > the entire patc
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2013, Wei Mi wrote:
>> For the failed testcase, it was compiled using -fmodulo-sched.
>> modulo-sched phase set SCHED_GROUP_P of a jump insn to be true, which
>> means the jump insn should be scheduled with prev insn as a g
afdo_propagate_multi_edge can do everything afdo_propagate_single_edge
does. So we refactor the code to keep only one afdo_propagate_edge
function.
Bootstrapped and passed all unittests and performance tests.
OK for googlge branch?
Thanks,
Dehao
Index: gcc/auto-profile.c
===
Ok.
David
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> afdo_propagate_multi_edge can do everything afdo_propagate_single_edge
> does. So we refactor the code to keep only one afdo_propagate_edge
> function.
>
> Bootstrapped and passed all unittests and performance tests.
>
> OK for googl
Thanks, Deaho.
One other thing that I've found on the LLVM implementation (that I'm
not sure happens in GCC): self-referential edges. If a loop consists
of a single-basic block, the back edge will point to itself. I
haven't been able to reproduce it with regular control flow constructs
in GCC.
When running bootstrap-ubsan I got an error in stage2, the issue was
that some Lubsan_types were wrongfully discarded -> link error.
Thus fixed.
Ubsan testsuite passes with -m32/-m64, ok for trunk?
2013-11-25 Marek Polacek
* ubsan.c (ubsan_type_descriptor): Set DECL_PRESERVE_P on a de
In this case the backedge will be a critical edge, which will be split by GCC.
David
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Thanks, Deaho.
>
> One other thing that I've found on the LLVM implementation (that I'm
> not sure happens in GCC): self-referential edges. If a loop con
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Thanks, Deaho.
>
> One other thing that I've found on the LLVM implementation (that I'm
> not sure happens in GCC): self-referential edges. If a loop consists
> of a single-basic block, the back edge will point to itself. I
> haven't been
On 11/22/13 08:56, Richard Biener wrote:
So the issue here is we can create irreducible regions & new nested
loops. Does just setting the header,latch fields for the current loop
handle those cases?
Yes.
Fixed via the attached patch.
Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-unknown-lin
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 06:15:50PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > What's the reason you cannot defer SIMD cloning to LTRANS stage
> > > as simple IPA pass next to IPA-PTA?
> >
> > Ok, deferring till after IPA-PTA was easy, just small ipa-cp.c changes
> > (look at the attribute rather than simd*cl
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> Thanks, Deaho.
>>
>> One other thing that I've found on the LLVM implementation (that I'm
>> not sure happens in GCC): self-referential edges. If a loop consists
>> of a single-basic b
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> In this case the backedge will be a critical edge, which will be split by GCC.
Right. So, if I split it, I will reach essentially the same
conclusion, I think. The new block will get the original block's
weight, which (in turn) will tran
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> In this case the backedge will be a critical edge, which will be split by
>> GCC.
>
> Right. So, if I split it, I will reach essentially the same
> conclusion, I think. The new b
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Dehao Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Xinliang David Li
>> wrote:
>>> In this case the backedge will be a critical edge, which will be split by
>>> GCC.
>>
>> Right. So, if I split it, I w
On 11/24/13 00:30, Wei Mi wrote:
Sorry about the problem.
For the failed testcase, it was compiled using -fmodulo-sched.
modulo-sched phase set SCHED_GROUP_P of a jump insn to be true, which
means the jump insn should be scheduled with prev insn as a group.
When modulo scheduling is finished, th
On 11/25/13 04:12, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
I'll prepare a patch to remove committed patches. But the first part
of series added new ISA extension support. It is independent from the
checker. Should it be OK to keep ISA in trunk?
I think this can/should reasonably be Uros's call.
I'm sorry we d
On 11/25/13 02:22, bin.cheng wrote:
Hi,
I previously committed two patches lowering complex address expression for
IVOPT at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg00546.html and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01103.html
When I bootstrapping GCC I found there were some peculiar
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 06:15:50PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > > What's the reason you cannot defer SIMD cloning to LTRANS stage
> > > > as simple IPA pass next to IPA-PTA?
> > >
> > > Ok, deferring till after IPA-PTA was easy, just small ipa-cp.c changes
> > > (look at the attribute rather
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 07:48:34PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > isn't exactly enabled by default ;)
>
> OK :))
> > Anyway, all the pass needs is bodies of functions with "omp declare simd"
> > attribute which will be defined in the current partition, for functions
> > defined in other partitions
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 07:48:34PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > > isn't exactly enabled by default ;)
> >
> > OK :))
> > > Anyway, all the pass needs is bodies of functions with "omp declare simd"
> > > attribute which will be defined in the current partition, for functions
> > > defined in oth
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/24/13 00:30, Wei Mi wrote:
>>
>> Sorry about the problem.
>>
>> For the failed testcase, it was compiled using -fmodulo-sched.
>> modulo-sched phase set SCHED_GROUP_P of a jump insn to be true, which
>> means the jump insn should be schedul
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Rong Xu wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Rong Xu wrote:
Hi,
This patch injects a condition into the instrumented code
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 07:20:33PM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> When running bootstrap-ubsan I got an error in stage2, the issue was
> that some Lubsan_types were wrongfully discarded -> link error.
> Thus fixed.
>
> Ubsan testsuite passes with -m32/-m64, ok for trunk?
>
> 2013-11-25 Marek Pola
On 11/25/13 12:16, Wei Mi wrote:
I'll note you're doing an extra pass over all the RTL here. Is there any
clean way you can clean SCHED_GROUP_P without that extra pass over the RTL?
Perhaps when the group actually gets scheduled?
jeff
With your help to understand that sched group will not
On 11/25/13 08:35, David Malcolm wrote:
I'm not a fan of these "_layout" names, but I'm not sure what better to
call them. Perhaps:
GSS_OMP_PARALLEL_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITH_CLAUSES_CHILD_FN_DATA_ARG
GSS_OMP_SINGLE_LAYOUT -> GSS_OMP_WITH_CLAUSES
GSS_OMP_ATOMIC_STORE_LAYOUT ->
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/25/13 12:16, Wei Mi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll note you're doing an extra pass over all the RTL here. Is there
>>> any
>>> clean way you can clean SCHED_GROUP_P without that extra pass over the
>>> RTL?
>>> Perhaps when the group actually ge
fixed on the wide-int branch 205363.
On 11/23/2013 09:00 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/23/2013 02:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
@@ -2605,8 +2606,7 @@ cp_tree_equal (tree t1, tree t2)
switch (code1)
{
case INTEGER_CST:
- return TREE_INT_CST_LOW (t1) == TREE_INT_CST_LOW (t2)
-
Thanks for doing this conversion work. A few questions and comments:
1) Because rs6000 is one of the few ports that was completely
converted to wide-int instead of simply accommodating wide-int, what
is the compile-time performance impact of this conversion?
2) non_logical_cint_operand changed c
Jason Merrill writes:
> On 11/23/2013 02:20 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> @@ -2605,8 +2606,7 @@ cp_tree_equal (tree t1, tree t2)
>> switch (code1)
>> {
>> case INTEGER_CST:
>> - return TREE_INT_CST_LOW (t1) == TREE_INT_CST_LOW (t2)
>> -&& TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (t1) == TREE_INT_CST_
I replied to the wrong email when i sent the first version of this
emal. sorry.This was the comment that was addressed by this fix.
fixed on the wide-int branch 205363.
On 11/24/2013 08:43 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/23/2013 09:55 PM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
On 11/23/2013 08:47 PM, J
Steven Bosscher writes:
> On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 08:56 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Yeah, I think so. If "=>" mean "accepts more than", then there used
>> to be a nice total order:
>>
>> next_insn
>> => next_nonnote_insn
>> => next_real_insn
>> => next_active_insn
>
>
> Hi Richard
Hello!
Attached patch removes "left shift count >= width of type" warnings in
soft-fp code. The patch implements the same approach - checking of
rsize against _FP_W_TYPE_SIZE - as is implemented in corresponding
FP_FRAC_DISASSEMBLE_{2,4} macros a couple of lines below.
This patch removes all rema
Hi
Following N3644 discussion thread here is a patch proposal to
remove default zero-initialization of unordered containers iterator. I
also took the time to remove default zero-init of nodes _M_nxt pointer.
2013-11-25 François Dumont
* include/bits/hashtable_policy.h (_Hash_node_
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
