Thanks for the comments. All comments are accepted and the updated patch is
attached.
-Zhenqiang
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:00 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH,
Thanks for the comments. All comments are accepted and the updated patch is
attached.
-Zhenqiang
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:22 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH,
Thanks for the comments. Patch is updated.
-Zhenqiang
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Richard Henderson
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:03 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:32 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH, 6/10] aarch64: add ccmp CC mode
>
> On 09/22/2014 11:44 PM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> > +case C
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 12:52 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH, 7/10] aarch64: add function to output ccmp
insn
>
> On 10/11/2014 09:11 AM, Richard Henderson wrot
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 4:12 AM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH, 8/10] aarch64: ccmp insn patterns
>
> On 09/22/2014 11:45 PM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> > +(define_ex
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 4:46 AM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH, 9/10] aarch64: generate conditional compare
> instructions
>
> On 09/22/2014 11:46 PM, Zhenqiang Ch
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 5:40 AM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH, 10/10] aarch64: Handle ccmp in ifcvt to make
it
> work with cmov
>
> On 09/22/2014 11:46 PM, Zhenqi
The results are the same for Silvermont.
There are no significant changes on Haswell.
So I agree with Richard, let's enable this x86 wide.
Bootstrap/ passed.
Make check in progress.
Is it ok?
2014-10-25 Evgeny Stupachenko
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_internal): Increase
Ping again...
Thanks.
> From: bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de
> To: hubi...@ucw.cz
> CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; richard.guent...@gmail.com
> Subject: [PING] [PATCH] Fix PR ipa/61190, 2nd edition
> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:40:56 +0200
>
> Ping...
>
> see: ht
On 10/25/2014 12:10 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
> I think we only want to consider MEMs in patterns here, not MEMs in notes etc.
> (Not sure why I "fixed" it for s390 but not for x86...)
>
> Tested by making sure there were
> do you have any other (system) version of GCC, configured without
> --disable-libsanitizer?
Nope.
> 2) Make check_effective_target_fsanitize_address not only link dummy
> executable, but also run it and verify that exit code equals zero.
Yes, probably something along these lines, or restore th
> +/* Handle pragmas for compatibility with Intel's compilers. */
> +#define REGISTER_TARGET_PRAGMAS() do {
> \
> + c_register_pragma (0, "long_calls", aarch64_pr_long_calls);
> \
> + c_register_pragma (0, "no_long_calls", aarch64_pr_no_long
When assigning symbols to sections in ipa-comdats.c we currently
segfault when val is NULL. Fix by guarding against this case.
Tested on powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu.
OK for trunk?
2014-10-27 Markus Trippelsdorf
PR ipa/63649
* ipa-comdats.c (ipa_comdats): Guard against NULL.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
>
> Tested by making sure there were no code changes for gcc.dg, gcc.c-torture
> and g++.dg for x86_64-linux-gnu, and also by a boostrap. OK to install?
>
> Thanks,
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
>
> Tested by making sure there were no code changes for gcc.dg, gcc.c-torture
> and g++.dg for x86_64-linux-gnu, and also by a boostrap. OK to install?
>
> Thanks,
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
> It's a bit hard to read, so I've attached a -b version too.
>
> Tested by making sure there were no code changes for gcc.dg, gcc.c-torture
> and g++.dg for x86_64-
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
>
> It looks like this code should be iterating over the pattern rather than
> the full insn, or do MEMs in notes really count? If we iterate over the
> pattern the
Richard Sandiford wrote:
> gcc/
> * config/spu/spu.c: Include rtl-iter.h
> (ea_symbol_ref): Replace with...
> (ea_symbol_ref_p): ...this new function.
> (spu_legitimate_address_p): Update call accordingly.
> (spu_legitimate_constant_p): Likewise. Use FOR_EACH_SUBRTX.
On 10/15/2014 03:52 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
I'd say that we eventually should have a type flag that says
"this is a va-list type". If we really need to know that - because
I don't understand why we need to do this - the context should
tell us exactly whether we deal with a va_list object or n
This is a regression present on the mainline and 4.9 branch: declaring an
array of entries of a protected object results in an size overflow for the
array. There is a known overflow issue with entry families for protected
objects, which is papered over in the FE (see the top of Exp_Ch9), but th
Two-patch IRA series to fix PR 63340:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02636.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02637.html
It also fixes PR 63403.
Thanks,
Richard
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 09:37:12AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> *ping*
*pingx2*
Cheers,
James
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:17:21AM +0100, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The comment on widest_int_mode_for_size claims that it returns the
> > widest integer
This fixes an assertion failure in relate_alias_sets on an instantiated packed
array type, because of a missing test before invoking the function.
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on mainline.
2014-10-27 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/decl.c (gnat_to_gnu_entity): Apply special tr
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/24/14 07:16, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > This patch makes GIMPLE forwprop fold all statements, following
> > single-use SSA edges only (as suggested by Jeff and certainly
> > how this will regress the least until we replace manual
> > simplification
This fixes an ICE on a string concatenation with the -gnatd.h switch, which
causes TREE_PUBLIC to be set on a local temporary
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on mainline.
2014-10-27 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/utils.c (create_var_decl_1): For a variable declared
in t
Tested on x86_64-suse-linux, applied on mainline.
2014-10-27 Eric Botcazou
* gcc-interface/trans.c (gnat_to_gnu) : Minor tweaks.
--
Eric BotcazouIndex: gcc-interface/trans.c
===
--- gcc-interface/trans.c (revision 2166
Hi Kyrill,
On Monday 2014-10-20 10:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>> Thank you. Can you please also update gcc-5/changes.html on the
>> web side of things?
> Sure, but I'm not sure how to get access to the web pages cvs.
> Could you point me to the magic runes please?
does https://gcc.gnu.org/about.h
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Fortune
wrote:
> Alan Lawrence writes:
>> Patches 7-11 migrate migrate ARM, x86, IA64 (I think), and mostly PowerPC,
>> to
>> the new reduc_(plus|[us](min|max))_scal_optab. I have not managed to work
>> out
>> how to do the same for MIPS (specifically what
On 27/10/14 11:41, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Hi Kyrill,
On Monday 2014-10-20 10:41, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Thank you. Can you please also update gcc-5/changes.html on the
web side of things?
Sure, but I'm not sure how to get access to the web pages cvs.
Could you point me to the magic runes pleas
On 24 Oct 20:33, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:29:50PM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/opts.c b/gcc/opts.c
> > index 9b2e1af..d1a626c 100644
> > --- a/gcc/opts.c
> > +++ b/gcc/opts.c
> > @@ -1732,6 +1732,13 @@ common_handle_option (struct gcc_options *opts,
> >
> From: Christophe Lyon [mailto:christophe.l...@linaro.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2014 4:40 PM
> I tried to modify check_effective_target_bswap
> and added:
> + } else {
> + if { [istarget arm*-*-*]
> +&& [check_no_compiler_messages_nocache arm_v6_or_later
> ob
On 24 Oct 17:18, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 07:08:44PM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > On 24 Oct 16:35, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 07:41:12PM +0400, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > > > > malloc can fail, SIGSEGV in response to that is not desirable.
> > > > > Can't
On 24/10/14 19:41, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/24/14 08:09, Jiong Wang wrote:
ping~
thanks.
Regards,
Jiong
On 17/10/14 13:04, Jiong Wang wrote:
the cause should be one minor bug in prepare_cmp_insn.
the last mode parameter "pmode" of "prepare_cmp_insn" should match the
mode of the first paramete
Zhenqiang Chen writes:
> For CSiBE, ARM Cortex-m0 result is a little better. A little regression
> for
> MIPS. Roughly no change for PowerPC.
Do I take it that a little regression for MIPS is so small it can be
considered noise? I haven't had chance to run CSiBE to see the difference.
Thanks,
Ma
I will start with the gccgo contribution process from golang.
Thanks!
Lynn
On 10/15/2014 08:26 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Lynn A. Boger
wrote:
I'm working on a patch submission for gccgo to add the R_PPC64 relocation
definitions to libgo/go/debug/elf/elf.go.
I suppose we should reject conditional convert and commutative ops in
result operand ? since it would create 1-n mapping from match ->
result.
* genmatch.c
(fatal_at): New overloaded function with source_location as first parameter.
(has_opt_convert_or_commutative_ops): New function.
(lower)
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On October 27, 2014 1:49:54 AM CET, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>Richi,
>>
>>Does genmatch rely on static constructors or implicitly rely on the
>>order of static constructors? Sometimes those cause problems on AIX.
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
>>Boots
Here is the new patch that walks op looking for the reference to addr.
Passes internal benchmarks and regression tests. Ok for google/4_9?
Thanks,
Teresa
2014-10-27 Teresa Johnson
Google ref b/18110567.
* cgraphbuild.c (fixup_all_refs_1): New function.
(fixup_all_refs
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 12:26:48PM +0400, Yury Gribov wrote:
> On 10/21/2014 05:26 PM, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >this is the second version of the patch. Here the major changes from the
> >previous one:
>
> [snip]
>
> > case BUILT_IN_BCMP:
> >+ *intercepted_p = false;
>
> Th
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On October 27, 2014 1:49:54 AM CET, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>Richi,
>>
>>Does genmatch rely on static constructors or implicitly rely on the
>>order of static constructors? Sometimes those cause problems on AIX.
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
>>Boots
On 10/27/2014 12:47 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> + @var{NULL} if the combination of @var{prev} and this comparison is\n\
@code{NULL}
Otherwise ok.
r~
On 10/25/2014 03:16 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> gcc/
> * config/alpha/alpha-protos.h (some_small_symbolic_operand_int):
> Take an rtx and return a bool.
> * config/alpha/alpha.c (some_small_symbolic_operand_int): Likewise.
> Use FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_VAR.
> * config/alpha
On 10/25/2014 03:15 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> This is part of a series to remove uses of for_each_rtx from the ports.
>
> Tested by making sure there were no code changes for gcc.dg, gcc.c-torture
> and g++.dg for alpha-linux-gnu. OK to install?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
>
> gcc/
> *
On 10/25/2014 03:14 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> gcc/
> * config/alpha/alpha.c (alpha_set_memflags_1): Delete.
> (alpha_set_memflags): Use FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_VAR.
Ok.
r~
Hi Ian,
On Wed, 2014-10-22 20:36:53 -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
> This patch to the top level GCC configure script disables the go
> languages on some systems where it is known to not work. Bootstrapped
> on x86_64-unknown-gnu-linux.
I don't have a clue here, but in what way is Go broken for these
On 10/25/2014 03:13 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> gcc/
> * config/alpha/alpha.c: Include rtl-iter.h.
> (split_small_symbolic_operand_1): Delete.
> (split_small_symbolic_operand): Use FOR_EACH_SUBRTX_PTR.
Ok.
r~
On 10/24/2014 01:56 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
> And even with the _XOPEN_SOURCE business out of the way, there's still
> the question what to do about _POSIX_SOURCE in libiberty/sigsetmask.c.
> Given that it was introduced almost 20 years ago, it may well be
> unnecessary for the systems we still care
Hi Jim!
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:46:53 -0500, James Norris
wrote:
> This patch adds code to handle the OpenACC wait directive and
> the wait and async clauses for the wait directive as well as the
> other directives which support them.
>
> OK for gomp4 branch?
Yes, thanks!
Please either merge i
On 10/27/2014 12:48 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
>> > On 09/22/2014 11:43 PM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
>>> > > + /* If jumps are cheap and the target does not support
>>> > > conditional
>>> > > +compare, turn some more codes into jumpy sequences. */
>>> > > + else if (BRANC
On 10/27/2014 12:48 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> Thanks for the comments. All comments are accepted and the updated patch is
> attached.
>
> -Zhenqiang
New patch looks good.
r~
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2014-10-22 20:36:53 -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
>> This patch to the top level GCC configure script disables the go
>> languages on some systems where it is known to not work. Bootstrapped
>> on x86_64-unknown-gnu-linux.
>
> I do
On 10/27/2014 12:48 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:r...@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:32 PM
>> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
>> Subject: Re: [Ping] [PATCH, 6/10] aarch64: add ccmp CC mode
>>
>> On 09/2
Hi all,
The attached patch is an attempt to fix the bug PR ipa/63576.
As it is said in the comment to the bug,
Jan Hubicka wrote:
> THen you need to sum counts (instead of taking ones from BB) and
> turn them back to frequencies (because it is profile only counts
> should be non-0)
It seems that
On 27/10/14 15:30, Ilya Palachev wrote:
Hi all,
The attached patch is an attempt to fix the bug PR ipa/63576.
As it is said in the comment to the bug,
Jan Hubicka wrote:
THen you need to sum counts (instead of taking ones from BB) and
turn them back to frequencies (because it is profile only
On 10/27/2014 12:49 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> + {AARCH64_CC_Z, 0}, /* EQ, Z == 1. */
> + {0, AARCH64_CC_Z}, /* NE, Z == 0. */
> + {AARCH64_CC_C, 0}, /* CS, C == 1. */
> + {0, AARCH64_CC_C}, /* CC, C == 0. */
> + {0, 0}, /* MI, not supported*/
> + {0, 0}, /* PL, not supported*/
> + {0,
Yury Gribov writes:
> --- a/include/libiberty.h
> +++ b/include/libiberty.h
> @@ -655,6 +655,33 @@ extern size_t strnlen (const char *, size_t);
> extern int strverscmp (const char *, const char *);
> #endif
>
> +#if defined(HAVE_DECL_STRTOL) && !HAVE_DECL_STRTOL
> +extern long int strtol (co
On 10/27/2014 12:50 AM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> Good point. It is not ccmp special. It is cbranchcc4 related. If I
> understand correct, without cbranchcc4, we need put the result to a tmp
> register and generate additional compares, which is not good for
> performance.
It won't be an additional
On Mon, 2014-10-27 08:19:34 -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-10-22 20:36:53 -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
> > > This patch to the top level GCC configure script disables the go
> > > languages on some systems where it is known to no
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:27:02AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 09/16/2014 10:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >vptr-5.C is one Jason mailed me yesterday, clang++ doesn't instrument this
> >and g++ right now doesn't either, build_static_cast_1 certainly isn't called
> >in that case, and I must say
ok.
thanks,
David
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Teresa Johnson wrote:
> Here is the new patch that walks op looking for the reference to addr.
>
> Passes internal benchmarks and regression tests. Ok for google/4_9?
>
> Thanks,
> Teresa
>
> 2014-10-27 Teresa Johnson
>
> Google ref
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-27 08:19:34 -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2014-10-22 20:36:53 -0700, Ian Taylor wrote:
>> > > This patch to the top level GCC configure script disable
This patch to libgo updates it to the Go 1.3.3 release. This is just
a few bug fixes. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
Ian
diff -r 03219f2d0191 libgo/MERGE
--- a/libgo/MERGE Thu Oct 23 21:57:37 2014 -0700
+++ b/libgo/MERGE Mon Oct
This patch implements one of the remaining missing features in our C++14
support. To support references to the object being initialized, which
has also been a hole in our support of C++11 constexpr constructors, I
now pass down both the object being initialized and the initializer
we're buildi
I've merged svn trunk into the git dmalcolm/jit branch, specifically
from trunk r216746 aka fddbd0194b01f44c5b5f16379fd5405dcf6d71c0
(2014-10-27) bringing in all changes since r216524 aka
d14cac46135326115f0dc589b0b3d2d249d74cf7 (2014-10-21).
Some #include fixups were needed within gcc/jit to trac
Hi!
This patch fixes an issue in handling combined directives. The
code now accepts clauses for both the loop directive and the
other directive, i.e., parallel or kernels.
OK for gomp4 branch?
Thanks!
Jim
ChangeLog
2014-10-27 James Norris
* c/c-parser.c (c_parser_oacc_loop, O
ifunc support is hard-coded as false for BIONIC. This patch removes
this check and let
configure decide whether it should have ifunc support.
Thanks,
-Rong
ifunc_diff
Description: Binary data
ok.
David
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Rong Xu wrote:
> ifunc support is hard-coded as false for BIONIC. This patch removes
> this check and let
> configure decide whether it should have ifunc support.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Rong
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 01:00:41PM -0500, James Norris wrote:
> 2014-10-27 James Norris
Missing two spaces before <.
> * c/c-parser.c (c_parser_oacc_loop, OACC_LOOP_CLAUSE_MASK):
Note, gcc/c/ directory has its own ChangeLog, so the c/ prefix doesn't
belong into ChangeLog entries.
On 10/27/14 08:24, Jiong Wang wrote:
On 24/10/14 19:41, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/24/14 08:09, Jiong Wang wrote:
ping~
thanks.
Regards,
Jiong
On 17/10/14 13:04, Jiong Wang wrote:
the cause should be one minor bug in prepare_cmp_insn.
the last mode parameter "pmode" of "prepare_cmp_insn" shoul
Ok, I've now pushed the previously-approved first half of this, and am now
looking at replacing VEC_RSHIFT_EXPR with a VEC_PERM_EXPR. However: does it seem
reasonable to push this patch 11 (removing VEC_LSHIFT_EXPR and vec_shl_optab)
out-of-sequence? The patch applies almost-cleanly, there is ju
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Fixed PR/63582. Tested with no regressions on x86-64 and ix86. Ok?
>
> * tree.c (build_common_tree_nodes): Don't even store the
> __int128 types if they're not supported.
OK.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
> > Fixed PR/63582. Tested with no regressions on x86-64 and ix86. Ok?
> >
> > * tree.c (build_common_tree_nodes): Don't even store the
> > __int128 types if they're not supported.
>
> OK.
Thanks! Committed.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On October 27, 2014 1:49:54 AM CET, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>Richi,
>>
>>Does genmatch rely on static constructors or implicitly rely on the
>>order of static constructors? Sometimes those cause problems on AIX.
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
>>Boots
> On 10/10/14 22:58, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 10/09/14 03:07, Phil Muldoon wrote:
> Given the length of time since the original post and now, can you please do
> sanity bootstrap to make sure nothing's bitrotted before you commit?
>> I've built both pristine and patched branches with bootstrap ena
On Thu, 2014-10-16 at 12:36 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/16/14 05:27, Richard Biener wrote:
> >>
> >> This required numerous essentially mechanical changes to the patches
> >> e.g. for the big reworking of cgraph functions to be methods. I've been
> >> working on the assumption that these variou
On October 27, 2014 8:13:09 PM CET, David Edelsohn wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:37 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On October 27, 2014 1:49:54 AM CET, David Edelsohn
> wrote:
>>>Richi,
>>>
>>>Does genmatch rely on static constructors or implicitly rely on the
>>>order of static constructors? S
On 2014-10-27 7:12 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Two-patch IRA series to fix PR 63340:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02636.html
"This significantly reduces the number of redundant classes in the
cost_classes structure, so it's also a minor compile-time improvement.
The time for
On October 27, 2014 7:43:05 PM CET, Alan Lawrence wrote:
>Ok, I've now pushed the previously-approved first half of this, and am
>now
>looking at replacing VEC_RSHIFT_EXPR with a VEC_PERM_EXPR. However:
>does it seem
>reasonable to push this patch 11 (removing VEC_LSHIFT_EXPR and
>vec_shl_optab)
On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 13:50 -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
> I've merged svn trunk into the git dmalcolm/jit branch, specifically
> from trunk r216746 aka fddbd0194b01f44c5b5f16379fd5405dcf6d71c0
> (2014-10-27) bringing in all changes since r216524 aka
> d14cac46135326115f0dc589b0b3d2d249d74cf7 (2014-
These patches move the type-checking of gimple statement accessors
from run-time to compile-time, for about half of the accessors.
I've pushed them to the git branch "dmalcolm/gimple-classes", which
can be seen at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/dmalcolm/gimple-classes
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 10/89] Update ssa_prop_visit_phi_fn callbacks to take a gimple_phi
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01216.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK when prerequisites have gone in.
in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pa
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 03/89] Introduce gimple_bind and use it for accessors.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01190.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> This is fine, with the same requested changes as #2; specifically
> using an exp
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 05/89] Introduce gimple_assign and use it in various places
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01151.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> Similar to the gimple_cond patch. Update for the changes in the
> prerequis
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 07/89] Introduce gimple_debug and use it in a few places
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01192.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> Same as prior patches.
in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-05/msg00598.
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 06/89] Introduce gimple_label and use it in a few places
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01152.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> Same as prior patches for gimple_cond and gimple_assign.
in https://gcc.gnu.or
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 15/89] tree-ssa-loop-manip.c: use gimple_phi in three places
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01217.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK when prerequisites have gone in.
in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 02/89] Introduce gimple_switch and use it in various places
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01154.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> So it sounds like Richi really prefers the explicit casting rather
> than m
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 04/89] Introduce gimple_cond and use it in various places
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01153.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> This is generally fine. It needs minor tweaks due to the change in how
> we'r
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 21/89] Introduce gimple_return
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01180.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK after fixing up the naming/const stuff as discussed for prior
> patches.
> That applies to 22-30. Mak
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 27/89] Introduce gimple_eh_must_not_throw
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01218.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK after fixing up the naming/const stuff as discussed for prior
> patches.
> That applies to
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 22/89] Introduce gimple_goto
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01174.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK after fixing up the naming/const stuff as discussed for prior
> patches.
> That applies to 22-30. Make
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 24/89] Introduce gimple_transaction
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01207.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK after fixing up the naming/const stuff as discussed for prior
> patches.
> That applies to 22-30
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 29/89] Introduce gimple_resx
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01161.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK after fixing up the naming/const stuff as discussed for prior
> patches.
> That applies to 22-30. Make
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 35/89] Introduce gimple_omp_atomic_store
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01227.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK with expected changes due to renaming/updates to const handling.
> Please repost the final
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 40/89] tree-cfg.c: Make verify_gimple_call require a gimple_call
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01232.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK when prerequisites have gone in.
in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patc
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 41/89] Introduce gimple_omp_task
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01160.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK with expected changes due to renaming/updates to const handling.
> Please repost the final patch fo
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 33/89] Use more concrete types for various gimple statements
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01226.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK after prerequisites have gone in.
in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 47/89] omp-low.c: Use more concrete types of gimple statement for
various locals
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01203.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK once prerequisites have gone in.
in https://gcc.gn
This corresponds to:
[PATCH 45/89] Introduce gimple_omp_sections
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01188.html
from the original 89-patch kit
That earlier patch was approved by Jeff:
> OK with expected changes due to renaming/updates to const handling.
> Please repost the final patc
1 - 100 of 189 matches
Mail list logo
