On 12/09/14 15:33, Matthew Fortune wrote:
Hi Prachi,
I'm afraid you updated the wrong Changelog with this commit. GCC changes
are recorded in gcc/ChangeLog.
I'm not sure what the correct procedure is for fixing this.
Jeff: Should a mistake like this be fixed by removing the entry
from the top
On 09 Dec 14:59, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Dec 2014, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > Unfortunately, this fix was not general enough.
> > There might be cases when mixed object files get into lto-wrapper, ie some
> > of
> > them contain only LTO sections, some contain only offload sections, and some
On Sun, 2014-11-30 at 20:08 +0100, Oleg Endo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In libgcc/lib1funcs.S the usage of the __SHMEDIA__ macro seems to
> mismatch the setup in sh/sh-c.c (sh_cpu_cpp_builtins). __SHMEDIA__ is
> always defined when building for SH5 / SH64, even when the subtarget is
> SHcompact. Thus, whe
On 12/05/14 05:15, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the ivopt
issue still exists.
Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates given
below reasons:
1) to better handle loops with many induction uses but the best
On 12/09/14 14:10, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I am tired of dumping entire DIEs just to see what type they are. With
this patch, we get:
(gdb) print context_die
$5 = >
I know it's past the end of stage1, but this debugging aid can help in
fixing bugs in stage >= 3.
I am committing this to the [deb
Hi Jason,
> I ran the tramp3d benchmark over 500 iterations before and after the
change and couldn't see any measurable difference in runtime. The
binary with my
> change was 0.4% smaller.
I'm going to go ahead and check it in; if a performance hit shows up on
the automated testing we can revi
On 12/09/14 12:21, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
This fixes a bug in register preferencing. When live range splitting creates a
new register from
another, it copies most fields except for the register preferences. The
preference GENERAL_REGS is
used as reg_pref[i].prefclass is initialized with GENERAL_
On 09/12/14 20:34 +0100, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 08/12/14 23:53 +0100, François Dumont wrote:
After having installed all necessary locales on my system I end
up with 4 failures. Here is a patch to fix them all.
Did you discover why only you are seei
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:33:52AM +0300, Evgeny Stupachenko wrote:
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/blend.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
>> +/* Test correctness of size 3 store groups permutation. */
>> +/* { dg-do run } */
>
On 30/11/14 20:48 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I think we also need this to make __numpunct_cache and
__moneypunct_cache exception-safe. If we set _M_allocated=true at the
start of the _M_cache functions and then an allocation throws we will
delete[] the memory allocated in _M_cache, but then th
Hi,
This documents the new SH FPSCR built-in functions.
Tested with 'make info dvi pdf', committed as r218551.
Cheers,
Oleg
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/53513
* doc/extend.texi (__builtin_sh_get_fpscr, __builtin_sh_get_fpscr):
Document it.
Index: gcc/doc/extend.texi
=
Hi,
This mentions the SH changes for GCC 5 that have happened so far.
Committed.
Cheers,
Oleg
Index: htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-5/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.49
diff -u -r1.49 changes
Thanks to Geoff Romer for suggesting this change, which might be
needed if we change std::function to only be able to call const
operator() overloads for C++17.
Tested x86_64-linux and powerpc64-linux, committed to trunk.
commit d4eb711ad60cf2925d8f8f6c622918c648a51e13
Author: Jonathan Wakely
D
On 12/04/2014 05:16 PM, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
> +static rtx
> +cc_in_cond (rtx cond)
> +{
> + if ((HAVE_cbranchcc4) && cond
Silly parens around the HAVE_cbranchcc4.
> + && (GET_MODE_CLASS (GET_MODE (XEXP (cond, 0))) == MODE_CC))
More silly parens around the ==.
> + /* Skip it if the inst
This patch to the Go compiler fixes a crash when using field tracking.
The code was failing to lower a function call added by the field
tracking code. When called in a type equality function for a type
that was not otherwise used, this could cause a crash as the type was
never lowered. This patch
Two defect reports that protect against dangerous uses of std::regex
involving dangling references to temporaries:
http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2329
http://cplusplus.github.io/LWG/lwg-defects.html#2332
Tested x86_64-linux & powerpc64-linux, committed to trunk.
commit 616ac2600b
Hi,
As mentioned in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg00609.html, the
load/store pair peepholes currently accept volatile mem which can
cause wrong code as the architecture does not define which part of the
pair happens first.
This patch disables the peephole for volatile mem and add
We should check whether the template we're trying to specialize is the
right kind of template.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
commit af5860b1a4bac653093a74d97a00b162c2b1add7
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Tue Dec 9 12:53:26 2014 -0500
PR c++/64129
* decl.c (grokdeclara
In this testcase, while we're tentatively parsing a function declarator
we came across __FUNCTION__, tried to predeclare it, and failed because
we were in function parameter scope; then when we try again later it
fails again because we cached the error_mark_node. So don't try the
first time.
2014-12-09 21:16 GMT+08:00 Richard Biener :
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:36 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
>> Hi, all,
>>
>> In the discussion thread last year:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-05/msg01334.html
>>
>> I extended the script ./contrib/download_prerequisites so that it can
>> downlo
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Hi,
> As mentioned in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-12/msg00609.html, the
> load/store pair peepholes currently accept volatile mem which can
> cause wrong code as the architecture does not define which part of the
> pair happe
2014-12-09 23:08 GMT+08:00 Ian Lance Taylor :
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Kito Cheng wrote:
>>
>> This patch update `Bit operations` section in libgcc.text, most bit
>> operation function is take an unsigned integer instead of signed
>> integer in libgcc/libgcc2.c [1], and it seem more make
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/05/14 05:15, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> Though PR62178 is hidden by recent cost change in aarch64 backend, the
>> ivopt
>> issue still exists.
>>
>> Current candidate selecting algorithm tends to select fewer candidates
>> given
>> below
Sorry for all the trouble. I messed up with the Changelog by mistake. I'll be
careful now onwards.
Prachi
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:05 AM
To: Matthew Fortune; Prachi Godbole
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [P
I don't really know this code, but this typo looks obvious enough.
Using if (p->high != NULL_TREE) ... else if (p->high != NULL_TREE)
couldn't be possibly desired, so use Q in the else branch, as in
the code slightly above.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and ppc64-linux, ok for trunk?
201
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 07:57:46AM +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> I don't really know this code, but this typo looks obvious enough.
> Using if (p->high != NULL_TREE) ... else if (p->high != NULL_TREE)
> couldn't be possibly desired, so use Q in the else branch, as in
> the code slightly above.
>
>
101 - 126 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
