Richard Sandiford writes:
> wide-int fails to build libitm because of a bad interaction between:
>
> /* Keep the OI and XI modes from confusing the compiler into thinking
>that these modes could actually be used for computation. They are
>only holders for vectors during data movement. */
Hi,
On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:47:19, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>>> I think you are right, this flag is no longer necessary, and removing
>>> this code path would simplify everything. Therefore I'd like to propose
>>> to remove the "keep_alignin
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Zhenqiang Chen
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ARM trunk build fail from @209484, since it requires the argument of
> GET_MODE_SIZE to be "enum machine_mode".
>
> gcc/gcc/config/arm/arm.c:21433:13: error: invalid conversion from
> 'int' to 'machine_mode' [-fpermissive]
> ...
>
>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> I think for 4.10 we should revisit inliner behaviour to be more LTO and
> LTO+FDO
> ready. This is first of small patches I made to sanitize behaviour of current
> bounds.
>
> The main problem LTO brings is that we get way too many inli
First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. Maybe one day we'll have
the same in rtl :-)
But...
David Malcolm writes:
> In doing the checked downcasts I ran into the verbosity of the as_a <>
> API (in our "is-a.h"). I first tried simplifying them with custom
> functions e.g.:
>
>static inli
On 17/04/14 18:06, Daniel Marjamäki wrote:
Hello!
I am not against it..
However I think there is no danger. I see no potential use of
uninitialized variable.
The use of n_unroll is guarded by n_unroll_found.
Hmmm... you're right. I guess the warning is just noise then.
I'll leave it up to ma
> I still have that already-approved patch, updated to current trunk.
> I've successfully boot-strapped it on armv7-linux-gnueabihf with
> all languages enabled, including Ada.
> The test suite runs cleanly without any drop-outs.
Thanks for the testing.
> Is it OK to commit now, or are there obje
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This patch fixes the adjustments performed by ipa_simd_modify_function_body
> on omp declare simd clones.
> Previously we've been trying to replace typically SSA_NAMEs with underlying
> PARM_DECLs of the to be replaced arguments with loads/store
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this patch makes FDO inliner to be more aggressive on inlining function
> calls that are considered hot. This is based on observation that
> INLINE_INSNS_AUTO is the most common reason for inlining not happening
> (20.5% for Firefox, whe
Marc Glisse writes:
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2014, Richard Henderson wrote:
>
>> On 04/21/2014 01:19 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>> + if (GET_CODE (trueop0) == VEC_SELECT
>>> + && GET_MODE (XEXP (trueop0, 0)) == mode)
>>> + {
>>> + rtx op0_subop1 = XEXP (trueop0, 1);
>>> + gcc_assert (GET_
Hi Eric,
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:09:28, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
>> I still have that already-approved patch, updated to current trunk.
>> I've successfully boot-strapped it on armv7-linux-gnueabihf with
>> all languages enabled, including Ada.
>> The test suite runs cleanly without any drop-outs.
>
On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> wide-int fails to build libitm because of a bad interaction between:
>
> /* Keep the OI and XI modes from confusing the compiler into thinking
>that these modes could actually be used for computation. They are
>only holders for v
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 6:56 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> This is a greatly-expanded version of:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01262.html
>
> As of r205034 (de6bd75e3c9bc1efe8a6387d48eedaa4dafe622d) and
> r205428 (a90353203da18288cdac1b0b78fe7b22c69fe63f) the various gimple
> stat
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> On 17/04/14 18:06, Daniel Marjamäki wrote:
>>
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am not against it..
>>
>> However I think there is no danger. I see no potential use of
>> uninitialized variable.
>>
>> The use of n_unroll is guarded by n_unroll_found.
>
>
>
> How about this? I added a check vs MINSIGSTKSZ just in case, and updated
> the commentary a bit. While 16K is 2*SIGSTKSIZE for i686, it certainly
> isn't for powerpc64. But since things are working as-is I thought the
> revision is clearer.
Fine with me, thanks.
--
Eric Botcazou
Richard Biener writes:
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> wide-int fails to build libitm because of a bad interaction between:
>>
>> /* Keep the OI and XI modes from confusing the compiler into thinking
>>that these modes could actually be used for computation.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> wide-int fails to build libitm because of a bad interaction between:
>>>
>>> /* Keep the OI and XI modes from confusing the compiler into thinki
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
>>> wrote:
wide-int fails to build libitm because of a bad interaction between:
/* Keep the OI and XI modes from
Hi!
In order to avoid the ftp.gnu.org security check failures in
make dist* (that we don't use anyway), I've committed following fix
to 4.9 branch.
--- boehm-gc/ChangeLog (revision 209553)
+++ boehm-gc/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+2014-04-22 Jakub Jelinek
+
+ PR other/436
> Sure, and thanks again for your help.
Thanks!
> I was not able to find any difference on the generated code with
> or without that patch.
Yes, my gut feeling is that TYPE_ALIGN_OK is really obsolete now. It is set
in a single place in the compiler (gcc-interface/decl.c:gnat_to_gnu_entity):
Ping?
Rebase and test. Bootstrap and no make check regression with qemu.
OK for trunk?
Thanks!
-Zhenqiang
On 18 March 2014 16:16, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For float value, movsfcc/movdfcc is required by emit_conditional_move
> called in ifcvt pass to expand if-then-else to "fcsel" insn.
> On Apr 22, 2014, at 2:36 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
>
> Ping?
>
> Rebase and test. Bootstrap and no make check regression with qemu.
>
> OK for trunk?
This is the exact same patch we (Cavium) came up with for this missed
optimization.
Thanks,
Andrew
>
> Thanks!
> -Zhenqiang
>
>> On 18
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> Richard Biener writes:
On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> wide-int fails to build libitm because of a
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Bin, when will the patch for the generic pass be available for review?
>
Hi,
The patch is still under working and reviewing. For arm we only need
to handle simple load/stores, so it may need to be extended to handle
generic memory access
Richard Biener writes:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> Richard Biener writes:
>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Richard Sandiford
>>> wrote:
Richard Biener writes:
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> wide-int
On 8 January 2014 18:13, Richard Henderson wrote:
> * config/aarch64/aarch64 (addti3, subti3): New expanders.
> (add3_compare0): Remove leading * from name.
> (add3_carryin): Likewise.
> (sub3_compare0): Likewise.
> (sub3_carryin): Likewise.
I think this s
On 8 January 2014 18:13, Richard Henderson wrote:
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (multi3): New expander.
> (madd): Remove leading * from name.
I think this should go in now we are in stage-1 /Marcus
On 8 January 2014 18:13, Richard Henderson wrote:
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.md (mulditi3): New expander.
> ---
> gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md | 17 +
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.md
> index
On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 23:19 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 11:03 -0700, Cary Coutant wrote:
> > >> The DWARF bits are fine with me.
> > >
> > > Thanks. Who can approve the other bits?
> >
> > You should probably get C and C++ front end approval. I'm not really
> > sure who nee
Hello,
Updated doc/invoke.texi by stating that new option is enabled by default at -O2
and higher.
Also, -fmerge-bitfields added to the list of optimization flags enabled by
default at -O2 and higher.
Regards,
Zoran Jovanovic
--
*ping*
Thanks,
James
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:40:24PM +, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We aim to improve code generation for the vector structure types
> such as int64x2x4_t, as used in the vld/st{2,3,4} lane neon
> intrinsics.
>
> It should be possible and cheap to get individual
On 18 February 2014 12:40, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> 2014-02-18 James Greenhalgh
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64-protos.h (aarch64_modes_tieable_p): New.
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> (aarch64_cannot_change_mode_class): Weaken conditions.
> (aarch64_modes_tieable_
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> Richard Biener writes:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Sat, Apr
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 12:56:53PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/
> * coretypes.h (gimple_goto): New typedef.
> (const_gimple_goto): New typedef.
>
> * gimple.h (gimple_statement_goto): New subclass of
> gimple_statement_with_ops, adding the invariant that
> stmt-
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 12:56:57PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/
> * coretypes.h (gimple_eh_filter): New typedef.
> (const_gimple_eh_filter): New typedef.
>
> * gimple.h (gimple_statement_base::as_a_gimple_eh_filter): New.
> (gimple_build_eh_filter): Return a gimple_eh
Ping for maintainer please.
Thanks,
Daniel.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Daniel Gutson
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> cc:ing Jason, who's the C++ maintainer.
>
>
> FWIW: I created http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60850
>
>>
>> Daniel G
Eric Botcazou writes:
>> But for the Solaris 9 stuff, it crystal clear that this cannot occur on
>> Solaris 10 and up (no single-threaded case anymore since libthread.so.1
>> has been folded into libc.so.1). Ok to remove this part?
>
> OK for the "Solaris 9 - single-threaded" part.
Thanks. I'v
Uros Bizjak writes:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
>> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
>> my Solaris maintainership.
>>
>> A couple of questions, though:
>>
>> *
Bruce Korb writes:
> On 04/16/14 04:16, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> I've already verified that trunk fails to build no sparc-sun-solaris2.9
>> and i386-pc-solaris2.9. Bootstraps on {i386,sparc}-*-solaris2.{10,11}
>> (and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for good measure) are in progress. I'll
>> verify that
Rainer Orth writes:
> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
> my Solaris maintainership.
>
> A couple of questions, though:
>
> * David: In target-supports.exp (add_options_for_tls), the commen
Andrew Haley writes:
> On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm
>> uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
>> merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers.
>
> We should not diverge from GNU Classpath
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> IMHO TER should be improved to *do* disturb the order of the incoming
> instructions, to reduce register pressure.
The latter is the goal, yes. But TER isn't really the right place for
that (it's constrained by too many invariants, running afte
On 04/22/2014 04:03 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. Maybe one day we'll have
the same in rtl :-)
But...
David Malcolm writes:
In doing the checked downcasts I ran into the verbosity of the as_a <>
API (in our "is-a.h"). I first tried simplifying them
Hi, I just committed the attached to fix up some indentation in aarch64.c
/Marcuscommit 9484cf884a28c18e310b31fcc283f75ade42e93d
Author: Marcus Shawcroft
Date: Tue Apr 22 13:27:39 2014 +0100
[AArch64] Fix indentation.
diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index e882ff8..b1bbe95 1006
We are subtract an extra "cfun->machine->frame.fp_lr_offset" which is
wrong, but the AARCH64_ROUND_UP below happen to compensate that, thus hiding
this bug.
The offset from FRAME_POINTER_REGNUM to STACK_POINTER_REGNUM is
exactly the sum of outgoing argument size, callee saved reg size
and local v
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm
> > uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
> > merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers.
>
> We s
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:07:29AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> GET_MODE returns VOIDmode on CONST_INT. It happens with -O0. This
> patch uses counter_mode on count_exp to get mode. Tested on
> Linux/x86-64 without regressions. OK for trunk and 4.9 branch?
Ok, thanks.
> 2014-04-17 H.J. L
Alan Lawrence wrote:
Sorry to be pedantic again, but 'wierd' should be spelt 'weird'. Otherwise,
looks good to me and much neater than before. (Seems you'd rather keep the
re-enabling, here and in the testsuite, for another patch?)
Hi,
Yes, the re-enabling is another patch.
Thanks for the ty
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> Rainer Orth writes:
>
>> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
>> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
>> my Solaris maintainership.
>>
>> A couple of questions, though:
>>
>> *
On 14 April 2014 11:28, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 14 April 2014 10:39, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>
>> PR libstdc++/43622
>> * config/abi/pre/gnu.ver (CXXABI_1.3.9): New version, new symbols.
>> * config/abi/pre/gnu-versioned-namespace.ver: New symbols.
>> * config/abi/po
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 14 April 2014 11:28, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 14 April 2014 10:39, Marc Glisse wrote:
PR libstdc++/43622
* config/abi/pre/gnu.ver (CXXABI_1.3.9): New version, new symbols.
* config/abi/pre/gnu-versioned-namespace.ver: New
David Edelsohn writes:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>> Rainer Orth writes:
>>
>>> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete
>>> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under
>>> my Solaris maintainership.
>>>
>>> A c
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
>>> David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX?
>>
>> AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option.
>
> Understood, but is the reason given in that comment (__tls_get_addr in
> libthread) correct? Seems like a Solaris 9 im
On 22 April 2014 14:23, Jiong Wang wrote:
> 2014-04-22 Renlin
> 2014-04-22 Jiong Wang
>
> gcc/
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.h (aarch64_frame): Delete "fp_lr_offset".
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_layout_frame): Likewise.
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_initial_el
On 22 April 2014 14:40, Tejas Belagod wrote:
> Alan Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> Sorry to be pedantic again, but 'wierd' should be spelt 'weird'.
>> Otherwise,
>> looks good to me and much neater than before. (Seems you'd rather keep the
>> re-enabling, here and in the testsuite, for another patch?)
>>
>
On 22 April 2014 14:55, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>> On 14 April 2014 11:28, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>>
>>> On 14 April 2014 10:39, Marc Glisse wrote:
PR libstdc++/43622
* config/abi/pre/gnu.ver (CXXABI_1.3.9): New version
David Edelsohn writes:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>
David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX?
>>>
>>> AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option.
>>
>> Understood, but is the reason given in that comment (__tls_get_addr in
>> libthread)
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
>> --- a/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
>> +++ b/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
>> @@ -687,8 +687,9 @@ generate_loops_for_partition (struct loop *loop,
>> partition_t partition,
>> }
>> else if (gimple_code (stmt) == G
Hi,
we have merged the gcc-4_9-branch into linaro/gcc-4_9-branch up to
revision 209611 as r209634 (to keep a track of the 4.9.0 release) and
up to revision 209633 as r209635.
This will be part of our 2014.04 release.
Thanks,
Yvan
This patch allows constant propagation from HIQI modes, as illustrated
by the attached testcase, by converting them into a new SImode pseudo.
It also merge the HIQI mode patterns using general_movdst_operand for both.
No regression on sh-none-elf. OK for trunk ?
Thanks,
2014-04-22 Christian Br
Ping.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00769.html
Any ideas? I recall chatter on IRC that we want to merge wide-int into trunk
soon. Bootstrap failure on arm would prevent that...
Thanks,
Kyrill
On 15/04/14 12:03, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all (and wide-int maintainers in particula
On 17-04-14 18:49, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
I see. I guess your proposed solution is ok then.
Vladimir,
Richard,
I've updated the fuse-caller-save patch series to model non-callee call clobbers
in CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
There are 2 new hooks:
1. call_fusage_contains_non_callee_clobbers.
- Original Message -
> On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > > * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm
> > > uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were
> > > merged upstream by
Tom de Vries writes:
> 2. post_expand_call_insn.
> A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets should update
CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE when emitting calls as part of the call expander.
Splitting the functiona
Hi,
Below is the revised patch addressing Richard's concerns about the
assertions. Bootstrapped and tested on
powerpc64[,le]-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Bill
[gcc]
2014-04-22 Bill Schmidt
* simplify-rtx.c (simplify_binary_operation_1): Optimize case of
nested
Kyrill Tkachov writes:
> Ping.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00769.html
> Any ideas? I recall chatter on IRC that we want to merge wide-int into trunk
> soon. Bootstrap failure on arm would prevent that...
Sorry for the late reply. I hadn't forgotten, but I wanted to wait
until
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vrp.c b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> index 902b879..62ec9f5 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> @@ -9517,10 +9517,11 @@ fold_predicate_in (gimple_stmt_iterator *si)
>else
> {
> gcc_assert (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_COND);
> + gimple_cond
On Apr 15, 2014, at 4:03 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> I tried bootstrapping the wide-int branch on arm-none-linux-gnueabihf and
> encountered some syntax errors while building wide-int.h and wide-int.cc in
> expressions that tried to cast to HOST_WIDE_INT.
Thanks, nice catch.
> Also, in c-ada-s
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:05:43AM -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 04/22/2014 04:03 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. Maybe one day we'll have
> >the same in rtl :-)
> >
> >But...
> >
> >David Malcolm writes:
> >>In doing the checked downcasts I ran into
On Apr 22, 2014, at 8:33 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Kyrill Tkachov writes:
>> Ping.
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00769.html
>> Any ideas? I recall chatter on IRC that we want to merge wide-int into trunk
>> soon. Bootstrap failure on arm would prevent that...
>
> Sorry f
On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
2. post_expand_call_insn.
A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets should update
CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE when emitting calls as part o
Ping~
OK for stage-1?
The original patch was posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00286.html
and the glibc patch was approved here:
http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-01/msg00120.html
Thanks,
Yufeng
On 01/07/14 16:34, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
Hi,
This patch is to sy
Tom de Vries writes:
> On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Tom de Vries writes:
>>> 2. post_expand_call_insn.
>>> A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to
>>> CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
>>
>> Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets should update
>> CALL_INSN
> Yes, this bootstrapped.
OK, I have installed a variant of the patch (it should not change anything).
Thanks for working on this.
--
Eric Botcazou
Hi!
I've committed this fix for invalid #pragma omp distribute parallel for.
If the #pragma omp for parsing returns NULL, i.e. it is invalid and the stmt
hasn't been added, then we shouldn't set OMP_PARALLEL_COMBINED on the
parallel and similarly for the distribute.
Tested on x86_64-linux, commit
On 22 April 2014 17:09, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
> Ping~
>
> OK for stage-1?
>
> The original patch was posted here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00286.html
> and the glibc patch was approved here:
> http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-01/msg00120.html
The glibc patch is now
On 22-04-14 17:05, Tom de Vries wrote:
I've updated the fuse-caller-save patch series to model non-callee call clobbers
in CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Vladimir,
This patch adds a hook to indicate whether a target has added the non-callee
call clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE, meaning it's
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 03:08:09PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 01:49:36PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > It reproduces on x86_64 too, I guess the reason why you aren't seeing this
> > is that you might have too old assembler that doesn't support
> > avx2 instructions (you
^Ping...
ok for stage 1?
Regards,
Jiong
On 02/04/14 12:04, Jiong Wang wrote:
^Ping...
Regards,
Jiong
On 18/03/14 14:13, Jiong Wang wrote:
Current, indirect function call prevents tail-call optimization on
AArch64.
This patch adapt the fix for PR arm/19599 to AArch64.
Is it ok for next st
On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 09:03 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. Maybe one day we'll have
> the same in rtl :-)
>
> But...
>
> David Malcolm writes:
> > In doing the checked downcasts I ran into the verbosity of the as_a <>
> > API (in our "is-a.h"). I f
On 22-04-14 18:18, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
2. post_expand_call_insn.
A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets
On Mon, 2014-04-21 at 18:45 -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > --- a/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
> > +++ b/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
> > @@ -687,8 +687,9 @@ generate_loops_for_partition (struct loop *loop,
> > partition_t partition,
> > }
> > else if (gimple_code (stmt) ==
On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 11:37 -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vrp.c b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > index 902b879..62ec9f5 100644
> > --- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > +++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
> > @@ -9517,10 +9517,11 @@ fold_predicate_in (gimple_stmt_iterator *si)
> >else
> > {
> >
On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 09:05 -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 04/22/2014 04:03 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > First of all, thanks a lot for doing this. Maybe one day we'll have
> > the same in rtl :-)
> >
> > But...
> >
> > David Malcolm writes:
> >> In doing the checked downcasts I ran into t
David Malcolm writes:
> Alternatively we could change the is-a.h API to eliminate this
> discrepancy, and keep the typedefs; giving something like the following:
>
> static void
> dump_gimple_switch (pretty_printer *buffer, gimple_switch gs, int spc,
> int flags)
> [...
On 04/22/2014 01:50 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 09:05 -0400, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Of course, it would be ideal if we could use 'gimple' as the namespace,
but that is currently taken by the gimple statement type... I'd even go
so far as to propose that 'gimple' should be ren
On 04/22/2014 02:56 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
David Malcolm writes:
Alternatively we could change the is-a.h API to eliminate this
discrepancy, and keep the typedefs; giving something like the following:
static void
dump_gimple_switch (pretty_printer *buffer, gimple_switch gs, int spc
> Ping of this ( http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg00888.html )
> patch.
That patch isn't for GCC mainline though, but OK on principle if you test it
on mainline, avoid the very ugly set-inside-use idiom and do:
record_hard_reg_sets (XEXP (op, 0), NULL, pset);
instead of reimplemen
On April 22, 2014 8:56:56 PM CEST, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>David Malcolm writes:
>> Alternatively we could change the is-a.h API to eliminate this
>> discrepancy, and keep the typedefs; giving something like the
>following:
>>
>> static void
>> dump_gimple_switch (pretty_printer *buffer, g
This is the first of 8 patches from reading through the diff with mainline.
Some places had an off-by-one error on an index and some used "<= 0"
instead of ">= 0".
I think we should use MAX_BITSIZE_MODE_ANY_MODE rather than
MAX_BITSIZE_MODE_ANY_INT when handling floating-point modes.
Two hunks co
This code was mixing hprec and hprec*2 wide_ints. The simplest fix
seemed to be to introduce a function that gives the minimum precision
necessary to represent a function, which also means that no temporary
wide_ints are needed.
Other places might be able to use this too, but I'd like to look at
Just a minor tweak to avoid several calculations when one would do.
Since we have a function for rounded-up division, we might as well
use it instead of the (X + Y - 1) / Y idiom.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c
This is an assorted bunch of API tweaks:
- use neg_p instead of lts_p (..., 0)
- use STATIC_ASSERT for things that are known at compile time
- avoid unnecessary wide(st)_int temporaries and arithmetic
- remove an unnecessary template parameter
- use to_short_addr for an offset_int->HOST_WIDE_INT o
Looks like a few uses of the old idiom:
BITS_PER_UNIT == 8 ? 3 : exact_log2 (BITS_PER_UNIT)
have crept in. This patch replaces them with LOG2_BITS_PER_UNIT.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/expr.c
===
register_edge_assert_for_2 operates on wide_ints of precision nprec
so a lot of the extensions are redundant.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/tree-vrp.c
===
--- gcc/tree-vrp.c 2014-04-22
Hello,
as written in the PR, my patch seems wrong for platforms like powerpc that
already had the __float128 typeinfo for long double with a different
version. The following patch regtested fine on x86_64, and a hackish
cross-build shows that float128.ver is ignored on powerpc (good).
2014-0
This patch undoes a few assorted differences from trunk.
For fold-const.c the old code was:
/* If INNER is a right shift of a constant and it plus BITNUM does
not overflow, adjust BITNUM and INNER. */
if (TREE_CODE (inner) == RSHIFT_EXPR
&& TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND
Almost obvious, but just in case...
The first mem_loc_descriptor hunk just reflows the text so that the
line breaks are less awkward.
Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. OK to install?
Thanks,
Richard
Index: gcc/doc/rtl.texi
===
--- gcc/
> This looks fine. LIPO has similar change too. Other directions worth
> looking into:
>
> 1) To model icache effect better, weighted callee size need to be
> used with profile. The weight for BB may look like: min(1,
> FREQ(BB)/FREQ(ENTRY)).
> 2) When function splitting is turned on, are any i
On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 13:13 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-21 at 18:45 -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > > --- a/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
> > > @@ -687,8 +687,9 @@ generate_loops_for_partition (struct loop *loop,
> > > partition_t partiti
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
