2014-10-08 23:41 GMT+04:00 Jan Hubicka :
>> +/* Pointer Bounds Checker has two IPA passes to support code
>> instrumentation.
>> +
>> +In instrumented code each pointer is provided with bounds. For input
>> +pointer parameters it means we also have bounds passed. For calls it
>> +me
> > if (same_type_p (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t1), long_long_unsigned_type_node)
> > || same_type_p (TYPE_MAIN_VARIANT (t2),
> > long_long_unsigned_type_node))
> > return build_type_attribute_variant (long_long_unsigned_type_node,
> >
This is what I have committed as r216016
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
===
--- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 216014)
+++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2014-10-08 Dominique d'Humieres
+
+
The following patch fixes recent failures with the tests after a
dg-options string was added to them which prevented the default options
from vmx.exp from being used.
Committed as obvious.
2014-10-08 Pat Haugen
gcc/testsuite:
* gcc.dg/vmx/3c-01a.c: Add default options from vmx.exp
On 10/08/14 04:27, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
If the port has a splitter to rip apart a douple-word load into single-word loads,
then we'd obviously only want to do that in cases where the double-word load
actually generates > 1 assembly instruction.
Or indeed if it is really a performance w
> 2014-10-08 23:41 GMT+04:00 Jan Hubicka :
> >> +/* Pointer Bounds Checker has two IPA passes to support code
> >> instrumentation.
> >> +
> >> +In instrumented code each pointer is provided with bounds. For input
> >> +pointer parameters it means we also have bounds passed. For calls i
>
> I prevent clone's body from removal and therefore original should call
> clone (otherwise clone may have no callers and be removed). I think
> call edge may work (need to recall other cases when reference do its
> work) but is it OK to have call with no stmt for non thunk nodes?
OK, I guess
On 08/10/14 23:28 +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
PR libstdc++/60132
* include/std/type_traits (is_trivially_copyable,
is_trivially_constructible, is_trivially_default_constructible,
is_trivially_copy_constructible, is_trivially_move_constructible,
is_trivially_assignable, is_trivially_copy
Hi,
Some of the SH4A LL/CS atomic sequences leave the T bit set to 1 after
they have finished executing. Somehow this went unnoticed when the
patterns were initially added a while a go. Committed as obvious to
trunk (r216018), 4.9 (r216019) and 4.8 (216020).
Cheers,
Oleg
gcc/ChangeLog:
OK, thanks, and after this patch, I shall try to find and send another patch
for gcc within this month. Hope I can succeed.
Thanks.
Send from Lenovo A788t.
Richard Henderson wrote:
>On 10/08/2014 03:47 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> It passes "make -k check" under Darwin x86_64.
>>
>> 2014-10-07 C
Hi
This patch moves the gcov-dump functionality to gcov-tool (which is
installed by default).
The options are exactly the same as before. The difference is instead of calling
"gcov-dump ...", we now call "gcov-tool dump ..."
gcov-dump is useful in debugging fdo issues. I think it would be very
he
Hi, Honza,
Sorry for the delay. I just picked up the original patch, and updated
it with your comments.
I've addressed most of your comments. Something else to discuss inlined.
I had refactored the patch to make it much less intrusive. New patch
is attached (ChangeLog will be added in the final
My recent change to build_cplus_array_type failed to consider typedef
variants.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit f28aac3ccf4b8d4ecea7f34a37dc18ff1a45649a
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Wed Oct 8 12:19:38 2014 -0400
PR c++/63485
* tree.c (build_cplus_array_type): L
On 10/01/14 17:27, David Malcolm wrote:
FWIW, presumably "insn" here also can now be an rtx_insn *?
(I'd like to eventually strengthen the params to the note-handling
functions, so fixing this up now would help with that).
Here's the updated patch to include strengthening insn to rtx_insn *.
On 10/03/14 11:54, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Hello!
My r215428 change exposed another PR 57003 problem on x86_64. When
compiling gcc.target/i386/pr57003.c we refer to clobbered %rdi
register after the call to memcpy:
--- pr57003.s 2014-10-03 15:08:24.0 +0200
+++ pr57003_.s 2014-10-03 15:08:
On 10/08/14 06:00, Marek Polacek wrote:
PR63480 points out that -Wmissing-field-initializers warns about
initializing with { }. Given that we suppress the warning for
initializing with { 0 }, I think it makes sense to suppress it
for { } as well.
(Initializing with { } is a GNU extension and -pe
On 10/07/14 15:07, Marek Polacek wrote:
Hi!
I'd like to kick off a discussion about moving the default standard
for C from gnu89 to gnu11.
This really shouldn't be much of a surprise: the docs mention that
gnu11 is intended future default for a year now. I would presume now
is a good time to m
On 9 October 2014 01:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Some of the tests have copyright dates of 2012-2014 - I think they
> should be just 2014, even if you copied existing files.
Some of them also had 010 as the month. :)
>
> Please break the ChangeLog entries to fit in 80 columns, e.g.
>
>
101 - 118 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
