Re: [PATCH 5/5] add libcc1

> "Joseph" == Joseph S Myers writes: >> + self->args.push_back ("gcc"); Joseph> seems wrong - at least you should use the appropriate compiler Joseph> name after transformation for cross compilers / Joseph> --program-transform-name. Ok, we'll look into it. Joseph> I'm not clear on which l

RE: [RFC][PATCH][MIPS] Patch to enable LRA for MIPS backend

I was thinking of something else but it doesn't appear to be good enough and most likely will follow the suggested way. Regards, Robert From: Richard Sandiford [rdsandif...@googlemail.com] Sent: 15 May 2014 22:34 To: Robert Suchanek Cc: Matthew Fortune; Vl

Re: add dbgcnt and opt-info support for devirtualization

Modified the patch according to yours and Richard's feedback. PTAL. thanks, David On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> Hi, debugging runtime bugs due to devirtualization can be hard for >> very large C++ programs with complicated class hierarchy. This patch >> adds the support

Re: [PATCH] Use optimize_function_for_size_p to assign register frequency

> This patch uses optimize_function_for_size_p to replace old > optimize_size check in regs.h and ira-int.h to make it consistent. > > Bootstrapped and testing on-going. > > OK for trunk if test passes? OK, thanks! Honza

[PATCH] Update bb count and freq when merging two blocks

This patch makes sure max count is used when merging two basic blocks. Bootstrapped and testing on-going. OK for trunk if test is ok? Thanks, Dehao gcc/ChangeLog: 2014-05-16 Dehao Chen * tree-cfg.c (gimple_merge_blocks): Updates bb count with max count. Index: gcc/tree-cfg.c ==

Re: [PATCH] Update bb count and freq when merging two blocks

> This patch makes sure max count is used when merging two basic blocks. > > Bootstrapped and testing on-going. > > OK for trunk if test is ok? > > Thanks, > Dehao > > gcc/ChangeLog: > 2014-05-16 Dehao Chen > > * tree-cfg.c (gimple_merge_blocks): Updates bb count with max count. >

Re: [PATCH] Update bb count and freq when merging two blocks

> > This patch makes sure max count is used when merging two basic blocks. > > > > Bootstrapped and testing on-going. > > > > OK for trunk if test is ok? > > > > Thanks, > > Dehao > > > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2014-05-16 Dehao Chen > > > > * tree-cfg.c (gimple_merge_blocks): Updates bb

Re: [PATCH 5/5] add libcc1

On May 16, 2014, at 11:48 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I've edited this one down by removing the auto-generated stuff , and > then compressed it. + // remove the "const" and handle deallcation from pointer types. sp: deallocation

Re: [PATCH (for next stage 1)] Add return type to gimple function dumps

On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 12:17 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 14:59 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 5:01 PM, David Malcolm wrote: > > > On Tue, 2014-04-29 at 11:16 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > >> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:58 AM, David Malcolm > > >>

Re: [PATCH 5/5] add libcc1

On May 16, 2014, at 11:48 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > This patch adds the plugin to the gcc tree So, this code isn’t as portable as gcc (I can run a native gcc bootstrap on my binutils sim simulator for my target, and I’m a newlib target), so it needs autoconf to explain if enough features are pres

Re: [PATCH] Fix ARM NAN fraction bits

On Fri, 16 May 2014, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > 2014-05-16 Maciej W. Rozycki > > > > PR libgcc/60166 > > * sysdeps/arm/soft-fp/sfp-machine.h (_FP_NANFRAC_S, _FP_NANFRAC_D) > > (_FP_NANSIGN_Q): Set the quiet bit. > > OK for glibc. Joseph, thanks for your review, this is now in.

[SH, committed] Adjust default branch cost

Hi, I've noticed that on e.g. SH2 and SH2A it seems to be better to set the branch cost = 2, as it is done for the SH4 variants. This results in overall slightly smaller code (according to CSiBE) and better utilization of the various T bit patterns. Tested on rev 210305 with make -k check RUNTE

[SH, committed] Fix some failing PR 51244 tests

Hi, Since recently, some of the PR 51244 tests started to fail. The attached patch fixes that. Tested on rev 210305 with make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}" and no new failures. Committed as rev 210535. Cheers, Oleg

[SH, committed] Fix some failing PR 54089 tests

Hi, since recently, some of the PR 54089 tests started to fail. The attached patch fixes that. Tested on rev 210305 with make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}" and no new failures. Committed as rev 210537. Cheers, Oleg

[PATCH] Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE

Is this patch ok for trunk? Bootstrapped and regression test on-going. Thanks, Dehao 2014-05-16 Dehao Chen * tree-inline.c (initialize_cfun): Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE. (copy_cfg_body): Likewise. Index: gcc/tree-inline.c ===

Re: [PATCH SH] Don't switch mode around fmov (pr61195)

On Fri, 2014-05-16 at 11:14 +0200, Christian Bruel wrote: > Hi, > > This patch reduces the number of unnecessary PR mode switches for single > precision moves. When FPSCR.SZ is not forced. Test illustration in the patch > > Regtested for sh-none-elf with -m4, (-m2a still running), bootstrapped >

Re: [PATCH SH] Don't switch mode around fmov (pr61195)

Christian Bruel wrote: > This patch reduces the number of unnecessary PR mode switches for single > precision moves. When FPSCR.SZ is not forced. Test illustration in the patch > > Regtested for sh-none-elf with -m4, (-m2a still running), bootstrapped > on sh4-linux-elf board. ok for trunk ? OK.

Re: [PATCH] Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE

> Is this patch ok for trunk? Bootstrapped and regression test on-going. > > Thanks, > Dehao > > 2014-05-16 Dehao Chen > > * tree-inline.c (initialize_cfun): Ensure count_scale is no larger > than REG_BR_PROB_BASE. > (copy_cfg_body): Likewise. This seems like wrong pl

Add a new test

This test makes sure compiler does not wrongly devirtualize virtual calls into __cxa_pure_virtual or __buitlin_unreachable. Ok to checkin? David Index: testsuite/ChangeLog === --- testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 210479) +++ testsuite/C

Re: [PATCH] Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > Is this patch ok for trunk? Bootstrapped and regression test on-going. > > > > Thanks, > > Dehao > > > > 2014-05-16 Dehao Chen > > > > * tree-inline.c (initialize_cfun): Ensure count_scale is no larger > > than REG_BR_PRO

[patch ping] libstdc++ testsuite cxxflags

It appears that this patch from last fall never got reviewed. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02340.html Can someone take a look? I'll commit the patch on Cesar's behalf if it's approved. -Sandra

Re: [PATCH] Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE

> In AutoFDO, a basic block's count can be much larger than it's actual > count because debug info might be incorrect. In this case, a call edge > count (calculated from BB count) could be much larger than callee's > header count, making the count_scale incorrectly large. In this case I still thin

Re: [PATCH] Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE

Do you mean adjusting bb->count? Because in expand_call_inline(tree-inline.c), it will use bb->count to pass into copy_body to calculate count_scale. Thanks, Dehao On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: >> In AutoFDO, a basic block's count can be much larger than it's actual >> coun

Re: [DOC Patch] symbol rename pragmas

This patch is in response to Rainer Orth's comment (below). I have a release on file with the FSF, but don't have SVN write access. Problem description: The (already committed) patch at the top of this thread removed a reference to Solaris. It has been requested that this be restored to show

Re: [PATCH] Ensure count_scale is no larger than REG_BR_PROB_BASE

> Do you mean adjusting bb->count? Because in > expand_call_inline(tree-inline.c), it will use bb->count to pass into > copy_body to calculate count_scale. What about taking here callee->count instead? For inline nodes without any capping hack, bb->count == edge->count = callee->count. When profi

Re: [patch ping] libstdc++ testsuite cxxflags

On May 16, 2014, at 5:16 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote: > It appears that this patch from last fall never got reviewed. > Can someone take a look? Tentative Ok. Let’s let the library people have a chance to weigh in… I’d say, let’s give them til Tuesday… should be enough time...

<    1   2