On 27/07/2014 08:12, Roman Gareev wrote:
Can you explain why you believe it is hard/impossible to generate a test
case without reduction?
I don't believe this. I only know that all the test cases considered
by me have the same problem.
Could you please explain what is 'reduction'? I've found o
I'm not sure which maintainer to cc for inline asm stuff?
I have a release on file with the FSF, but don't have SVN write access.
Problem:
extract_insn() in recog.c will ICE if (noperands > MAX_RECOG_OPERANDS).
Normally this isn't a problem since expand_asm_operands() in cfgexpand.c
catches a
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> > Hello,
> >
> > this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-07/msg01072.html
> >
> > As discussed, it does *not* ac
gcc.target/mips/const-anchor-[12].c started failing after:
2014-04-29 James Greenhalgh
* calls.c (initialize_argument_information): Always treat
PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED as 1, simplify code accordingly.
(expand_call): Likewise.
(emit_library_call_calue_1): Likewise.
Thank you! I've attached patches with a test case (it is located in
patch1.txt), which generates the following ISL AST:
for (int c1 = 0; c1 <= 49; c1 += 1) {
if (c1 <= 24)
S_4(c1);
S_5(c1);
}
I think that it doesn't contain reduction and doesn't yield several
bbs. I've also checked that p
On 27/07/2014 12:48, Roman Gareev wrote:
Thank you! I've attached patches with a test case (it is located in
patch1.txt), which generates the following ISL AST:
for (int c1 = 0; c1 <= 49; c1 += 1) {
if (c1 <= 24)
S_4(c1);
S_5(c1);
}
I think that it doesn't contain reduction and doesn
Wodr in common.opt was missing a Var, which means:
1) we ICE with -Wodr, since -Wodr isn't handled in opts.c;
2) -Wno-odr wouldn't work.
Thus fixed. I'd think this doesn't need a testcase...
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2014-07-27 Marek Polacek
PR middle-end/
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
--- gcc/tree-into-ssa.c (revision 212109)
+++ gcc/tree-into-ssa.c (working copy)
@@ -1831,26 +1831,38 @@ maybe_register_def (def_operand_p def_p,
{
tree def = DEF_FROM_PTR (def_p);
tree sym = DECL_P (def) ? def : SSA_NAME_VAR (def);
/* If DEF
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:16:07PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > this is the variant intended for the 4.8/4.9 branches of the patch:
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/g
> On Jul 27, 2014, at 4:53 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:16:07PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
Hello,
this is the variant intended for the 4.8/
Hello,
Patch below introduces mention of avx-512vlbwdq SVN
branch in htdocs/svn.html
Same prefix for e-mail (w/ avx-512) put intentionally.
Is it ok to install?
--
Thanks, K
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/svn.html,v
retrievi
Hello,
With this patch we'd like to start merge process of avx-512vlbwdq
branch into main trunk.
This patch introduces new switch `-mavx512dq'
Bootstrapped.
Is it ok for trunk?
* common/config/i386/i386-common.c
(OPTION_MASK_ISA_AVX512DQ_SET): Define.
(OPTION_MASK_ISA_AV
Am 27.07.2014 13:59, schrieb pins...@gmail.com:
>
>
>> On Jul 27, 2014, at 4:53 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 07:16:07PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 01:45:12PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Am 17.07.2014 02:41, schrieb Ulrich Weigand:
> He
The following binutils patches introduce a new moxie-based target
called moxiebox. Moxiebox is a VM developed by the bitcoin community
to act as a secure, sandboxed execution environment for bitcoin
automation.
See http://github.com/jgarzik/moxiebox for more information.
I'm checking these chan
Dear all,
attached is a first patch to gfortran.texi which add documentation about
libcaf*.c. The things are still a bit in a flux and it is incomplete
(atomics, locking, error stop and vector subscripts are still missing),
but one has to start somewhere …
OK for the trunk?
Comments on the
On 2014-07-26 17:14, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 07/26/2014 12:11 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 07/26/2014 03:04 AM, Braden Obrzut wrote:
On 07/25/2014 05:24 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Fair enough, but in that case let's use 'sorry' rather then
'error' to
be clear that it's a missing feature.
Tes
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014, Richard Biener wrote:
--- gcc/tree-into-ssa.c (revision 212109)
+++ gcc/tree-into-ssa.c (working copy)
@@ -1831,26 +1831,38 @@ maybe_register_def (def_operand_p def_p,
{
tree def = DEF_FROM_PTR (def_p);
tree sym = DECL_P (def) ? def : SSA_NAME_VAR (def);
/* If DEF
PR 61919 is another ripple from the patch to take advantage of rtx
sharing rules when instantiating virtual registers. In this case
the invalid sharing is coming from tree-outof-ssa.c, where the same
MEM rtx is being used in several moves. (Note that despite the name,
partition_to_pseudo maps to
> In the 59638 case, the declarations
>
> void (*a)(auto);
> void (*b)(auto) = 0;
>
> are shorthand for
>
> template void (*a)(T);
> template void (*b)(T) = 0;
>
> which, unless there's some constraint with variable templates that I'm not
> aware of, ought to define two variable templates
as per https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-07/msg00231.html
Richard
* MAINTAINERS: Remove my MIPS maintainer entry.
Index: MAINTAINERS
===
--- MAINTAINERS 2014-07-24 16:13:22.686714267 +0100
+++ MAINTAINERS 2014-07-27 19:01:59.
Marc Glisse writes:
> Hello,
>
> I followed the advice in this discussion:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00269.html
>
> and here is a new patch. I made an effort to isolate a path in at least
> one subcase so it doesn't look too strange that the warning is in this
> file. Compu
Hi Kirill,
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Patch below introduces mention of avx-512vlbwdq SVN
> branch in htdocs/svn.html
>
> Same prefix for e-mail (w/ avx-512) put intentionally.
>
> Is it ok to install?
you don't need to get explicit approval for release notes related to
your a
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Marc Glisse writes:
Hello,
I followed the advice in this discussion:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg00269.html
and here is a new patch. I made an effort to isolate a path in at least
one subcase so it doesn't look too strange that
On 2014-07-27 19:01, Andrew Sutton wrote:
In the 59638 case, the declarations
void (*a)(auto);
void (*b)(auto) = 0;
are shorthand for
template void (*a)(T);
template void (*b)(T) = 0;
which, unless there's some constraint with variable templates that
I'm not
aware of, ought to def
This patchkit converts more incremental hash users to the new
inchash class. The only larger change is for rtl hashing,
which I had to move to a new file to avoid problems
with the generator program. All changes should only
minimally change behavior.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-linux. Ok to
From: Andi Kleen
gcc/:
2014-07-25 Andi Kleen
* asan.c (asan_mem_ref_hasher::hash): Convert to inchash.
---
gcc/asan.c | 7 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/asan.c b/gcc/asan.c
index 475dd82..f7fa55f 100644
--- a/gcc/asan.c
+++ b/gcc/asan.c
@@
From: Andi Kleen
gcc/:
2014-07-25 Andi Kleen
* ipa-devirt.c (polymorphic_call_target_hasher::hash):
Convert to inchash.
---
gcc/ipa-devirt.c | 20 +---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-devirt.c b/gcc/ipa-devirt.c
index 12
From: Andi Kleen
gcc/:
2014-07-25 Andi Kleen
* tree-ssa-dom.c (iterative_hash_exprs_commutative): Convert to inchash.
(iterative_hash_hashable_expr): Dito.
(avail_expr_hash): Dito.
---
gcc/tree-ssa-dom.c | 79 +-
1
From: Andi Kleen
gcc/:
2014-07-25 Andi Kleen
* tree-ssa-tail-merge.c (same_succ_hash): Convert to inchash.
---
gcc/tree-ssa-tail-merge.c | 22 ++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/tree-ssa-tail-merge.c b/gcc/tree-ssa-tail-merge.c
From: Andi Kleen
gcc/:
2014-07-25 Andi Kleen
* tree-ssa-sccvn.c (vn_reference_op_compute_hash):
(vn_reference_compute_hash):
(vn_nary_op_compute_hash):
(vn_phi_compute_hash):
* tree-ssa-sccvn.h (vn_hash_constant_with_type):
---
gcc/tree-ssa-sccvn.c |
From: Andi Kleen
Convert dwarf2out and rtl.c to the new inchash interface.
I moved the rtl hash code to another file to avoid having to link
all the hash code into the generator functions.
gcc/:
2014-07-25 Andi Kleen
* Makefile.in (OBJS): Add rtlhash.o
* dwarf2out.c (addr_t
Marc Glisse writes:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> Marc Glisse writes:
>>> + if (always_executed)
>>> + msg = "function returns address of local variable";
>>> + else
>>> + msg = "function may return addres
Added checks to see if either cmmand-line options is not repeated,
and generates match-and-simplify code on both GENERIC and GIMPLE
if both -generic and -gimple are specified.
* genmatch.c (cmd_options): New struct.
(check_repeated_arg): New function.
(parse_cmd_arg): Likewise.
(main):
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Marc Glisse writes:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2014, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Marc Glisse writes:
+ if (always_executed)
+ msg = "function returns address of local variable";
+ else
+
Is it okay to include is-a.h ?
I have adjusted print_operand to use is_a<> and as_a<> in this patch.
* genmatch.c (is-a.h): Include.
(is_a_helper::test): Specialize for operand subclasses.
(print_operand): Adjust to use is_a and as_a.
Thanks,
Prathamesh.
Index: genmatch.c
> "Jürgen Urban" writes:
> > > "Jürgen Urban" writes:
> > > > Hello Richard,
> > > >
> > > > > "Jürgen Urban" writes:
> > > Is this something you
> > > have recently developed outside of the mainline kernel or does it already
> > exist.
> > > I'm not aware of such logic in the MIPS kernel yet.
>
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 03:16:03PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> Blah, that won't work of course. The macro needs to take two
> >> parameters.
> >>
> >> #define rs6000_special_adjust_field_align_p(FIELD, COMPUTED) false
> >
> > This is pre-approved if it works. I really should finish off the
So given this, should I leave the test cases that fail for this reason
alone or should I still change them to dg-message? It sounds like GCC's
behavior with auto in function parameters needs to be changed, but that
definitely sounds like a separate patch to me.
- Braden Obrzut
> But fact is that it is _not_ necessary to split the block because there
> are no outgoing abnormal edges from it.
>
> The verifier failure is an artifact from using the same predicates during
> CFG building and CFG verifying (usually ok, but for this particular
> case it leads to this issue).
>
>
Forwarded Message
Subject: [PATCH] Fix mklog to support running from arbitrary folder
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:32:45 +0400
From: Yury Gribov
To: GCC Patches
CC: Diego Novillo , Trevor Saunders
Hi all,
Current mklog works only if run from GCC top-level folder. The patch
On 07/21/2014 12:55 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
I'm not really sure which is the better UI,
but I'd rather time be spent
on better automatic change log generation.
Yeah. Do you have some particular complaints btw?
I may or may not hope we'll
eventually have a mklog that can autogenerate most C
Ping.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Andrey Turetskiy
wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Andrey Turetskiy
> wrote:
>>> * Don't duplicate the logic for what's a hosted POSIX system; refactor it
>>> to a common fragment in config/ (I guess it needs to be a shell script
>>> fragme
42 matches
Mail list logo
