Am 27.04.2015 um 13:17 schrieb Mikael Morin:
> Hello,
>
> while reviewing Thomas' bound simplification patch, I noticed that the
> {l,u}bound simplification code wasn't handling array subcomponents.
> Fixed by the attached patch, regression tested. OK for trunk?
Hi Mikael,
the patch is OK. Tha
On 27 April 2015 at 14:43, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>> static unsigned int
>> -aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode
>> ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> +aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode)
>> {
>> - return 2;
>> + if (GET_MODE_UNIT_SIZE (mode) == 4)
>> +r
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'gcc' has been submitted
by the German team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/gcc/de.po
(This file, 'gcc-5.1.0.de.po', has just
Hi all,
One of the pattens that maps to an sbfx instruction is
*extend_ashr which is a sign-extend of a shift-right
operation.
This is not handled in the rtx costs for sign-extend. This patch adds handling
of that form.
Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
Hi all,
In rtx costs we should remember to add the cost of operand 0 when handling the
compare-with-0.0 case.
This simple patch does that.
Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux.
Ok for stage 1?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs,
Hi all,
This patch adds handling of the FLOAT and UNSIGNED_FLOAT cases in rtx costs
that map down to
the scvtf and ucvtf instructions respectively. We use the fromint cost field
for them.
Tested on aarch64-none-elf.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
* config/aar
Hi all,
It occurs to me that in the IOR-of-shifts form of the rev16 operation we should
be costing the operand properly.
For that we'd want to reuse the aarch_rev16_p function that does all the heavy
lifting and get it to write the
innermost operand of the rev16 for further costing. In the proc
Hi all,
This patch is trivial. We already initialise the cost to COSTS_N_INSNS (1) at
the top of the function.
No need to overwrite it again. Just add the cost of a rev and recurse into the
operands.
Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-linux.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo T
On 1 May 2015 at 09:25, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> 2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs): Do not overwrite cost
> with COSTS_N_INSNS (1).
OK /Marcus
On 1 May 2015 at 09:20, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> 2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs, COMPARE case):
> Add cost of op0 in the compare-with-fpzero case.
ok /Marcus
Hi all,
As described in the thread bellow, there is a link-time workaround for
an erratum (843419) of some early revision of Cortex-A53. Similarly
to what was done for a previous erratum, this patch adds a new
configure-time option --enable-fix-cortex-a53-843419 that pass down
the linker option -
On 30/04/15 17:02, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 27 April 2015 at 14:24, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
2015-04-27 Kyrylo Tkachov
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs, MINUS):
Properly account for both operand costs in simple case.
OK /Marcus
Thanks, but my patch is just a subse
On 21 April 2015 at 15:00, Matthew Wahab wrote:
> 2015-05-21 Matthew Wahab
>
> * gcc/config/aarch64-protos.h (struct cpu_branch_cost): New.
> (tune_params): Add field branch_costs.
> (aarch64_branch_cost): Declare.
> * gcc/config/aarch64.c (generic_branch_cost)
On 24/04/15 16:41, Alex Velenko wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds rtl patterns to generate bics instructions with shift.
Added attribute predicable_short_it since last respin.
Done full regression run on arm-none-eabi and arm-none-gnueabihf.
Bootstrapped on arm-none-gnueabihf.
Is this patch ok?
gc
Hi,
This patch fixes PR65904, a double-free error that started occurring
after recent libgomp changes to the way offload images are registered
with the runtime.
Offload images now map all functions/data using just two malloc'ed
blocks, but the function gomp_free_memmap did not take that into
acco
This patch partially solves the problem described in N4426, which is
basically LWG
issue 2456, which in turn is caused by CWG DR 1330. Some remarks:
- the __is_swappable and __is_nothrow_swappable are at this time not
meant to be general traits, they make the shortcut of automatically transforming
On 1 May 2015 at 12:47, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> This patch partially solves the problem described in N4426, which is
> basically LWG
> issue 2456, which in turn is caused by CWG DR 1330. Some remarks:
..and I forgot to mention that it fixes PR 63860.
On 21 April 2015 at 17:10, Renlin Li wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is a simple patch to generate a move instruction to temporarily hold
> the large immediate for a add instruction.
>
> GCC regression test has been run using aarch64-none-elf toolchain. NO new
> issues.
>
> Okay for trunk?
>
> Regards,
On 4 March 2015 at 15:37, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Include the cost of op0 and op1 in all cases in PLUS and MINUS in
> aarch64_rtx_costs.
> Bootstrap & regression OK.
>
> ChangeLog:
> 2015-03-04 Wilco Dijkstra
>
> * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs):
> Calculate c
> Hmm, special-casing this in the inliner looks odd to me. ISTR the inliner
> already propagates constant parameters to immediate uses, so I guess
> you run into the casting case you handle specially.
Right on both counts, the original GIMPLE looks like:
right.3 = (system__storage_elements__in
On 04/30/2015 02:01 PM, Daniel Krügler wrote:
Shouldn't the "one-liner" forwarding function templates be declared as
inline? - Daniel
You are right.
This builds and tests clean on x86_64-linux.
OK?
2015-05-01 Edward Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net>
Inline one-line erasure dispat
I forgot to add these (useless) functions that are required for full
C++11 conformance.
Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk.
I will probably backport these to 5.2 as well.
commit 95d0e38e22b85e6ffeea15678c6dce114c029be7
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Tue Jan 20 12:14:11 2015 +
This updates the C++11 and C++14/TS status tables, and adds a new
table for C++17 features.
Committed to trunk.
commit c95071e70eaa69a47ae49c99c8ddb8d20c2e9085
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Thu Apr 30 21:35:55 2015 +0100
* doc/xml/manual/intro.xml: Link to new status_cxx2017.xml file.
On 01/05/15 07:01 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
On 04/30/2015 02:01 PM, Daniel Krügler wrote:
Shouldn't the "one-liner" forwarding function templates be declared
as inline? - Daniel
You are right.
This builds and tests clean on x86_64-linux.
OK?
Yes OK, thanks.
On 1 May 2015 at 10:11, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As described in the thread bellow, there is a link-time workaround for
> an erratum (843419) of some early revision of Cortex-A53. Similarly
> to what was done for a previous erratum, this patch adds a new
> configure-time option --enable-fix
> Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 27 April 2015 at 14:43, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>
> >> static unsigned int
> >> -aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode
> >> ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
> >> +aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode)
> >> {
> >> - return 2;
> >> +
Tested with make gcc.pot.
Andreas.
PR translation/65959
* params.h (DEFPARAM): Rename msgid to nocmsgid.
---
gcc/params.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/params.h b/gcc/params.h
index 28d077f..f53426d 100644
--- a/gcc/params.h
+++ b/gcc/par
Hi Marcus,
(Sorry wanted to cc you in my first mail but seems that gmail prefers
Maxim to Marcus ! ;)
On 1 May 2015 at 13:11, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 1 May 2015 at 10:11, Yvan Roux wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As described in the thread bellow, there is a link-time workaround for
>> an erratum
cpplib-5.1.0.sv.po.gz
Description: Binary data
The Translation Project robot, in the
name of your translation coordinator.
Hello, gentle maintainer.
This is a message from the Translation Project robot.
A revised PO file for textual domain 'cpplib' has been submitted
by the Swedish team of translators. The file is available at:
http://translationproject.org/latest/cpplib/sv.po
(This file, 'cpplib-5.1.0.sv.po',
On 1 May 2015 at 12:26, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>
>
>> Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
>> On 27 April 2015 at 14:43, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
>>
>> >> static unsigned int
>> >> -aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode
>> >> ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>> >> +aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (en
On 30 April 2015 at 20:38, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> This is a cleanup of the series of tests I added some time ago.
>
> During the latest reviews, I got comments about the fact that some
> intrinsics do not support all the vector types but the corresponding
> tests would still contain dummy expect
On 1 May 2015 at 09:21, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> 2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_rtx_costs): Handle FLOAT and
> UNSIGNED_FLOAT.
OK /Marcus
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Richard Biener writes:
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Andreas Schwab
>> wrote:
>>> Richard Sandiford writes:
>>>
Andreas Schwab writes:
> Richard Sandiford writes:
>
>> /* Represents a test and the action that should be taken on the result.
>
Jonathan Wakely writes:
> I've tested this on GNU/Linux and DragonFly BSD, but as it's probably
> not going to build everywhere I've added the configure option
> --enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts which defaults to enabled on GNU, BSD
> and Solaris targets, and disabled elsewhere for now. If it fai
On 23 March 2015 at 17:06, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> GCC can be compiled for aarch64 target with busybox sed except for
> the geniterators.sh script which uses nonstandard basic regex.
>
> I explicitly set LC_ALL=C too because the regex depends on collation
> order.
>
> I tested that the script gives
On 01/05/15 11:22, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 4 March 2015 at 15:37, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
Include the cost of op0 and op1 in all cases in PLUS and MINUS in
aarch64_rtx_costs.
Bootstrap & regression OK.
ChangeLog:
2015-03-04 Wilco Dijkstra
* gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64
> Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 5 March 2015 at 14:49, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> > This patch fixes the shift costs for Cortex-A53 so they are more accurate -
> > immediate shifts
> use
> > SBFM/UBFM which takes 2 cycles, register controlled shifts take 1 cycle.
> > Bootstrap and
> regression
> > O
On 01/05/15 14:07, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 5 March 2015 at 14:49, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
This patch fixes the shift costs for Cortex-A53 so they are more accurate -
immediate shifts
use
SBFM/UBFM which takes 2 cycles, register controlled shifts take 1 cycle.
Bootstr
> Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 1 May 2015 at 12:26, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> >> On 27 April 2015 at 14:43, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> >>
> >> >> static unsigned int
> >> >> -aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode
> >> >> ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
>
On 01/05/15 14:11, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 1 May 2015 at 12:26, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 27 April 2015 at 14:43, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
static unsigned int
-aarch64_min_divisions_for_recip_mul (enum machine_mode mode ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
+aar
Tested on Linux-x64.
2015-05-01 Ville Voutilainen
Implement observer_ptr.
* include/Makefile.am: Add new exported header.
* include/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
* include/experimental/memory: New.
* testsuite/experimental/memory/observer_ptr/assignment/assign.cc: Likewise.
*
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> We might want to check if doing -Og and not just -O0.
>
> You're right, thanks, amended patch attached, same ChangeLog.
Why should GCC unnecessarily create stack frames to avoid
compare-debug testcase failures?
- David
On 1 May 2015 at 13:39, Yvan Roux wrote:
> Hi Marcus,
>
> (Sorry wanted to cc you in my first mail but seems that gmail prefers
> Maxim to Marcus ! ;)
>
> On 1 May 2015 at 13:11, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
>> On 1 May 2015 at 10:11, Yvan Roux wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> As described in the thread be
On 05/01/2015 06:41 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Richard Sandiford writes:
Richard Biener writes:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Richard Sandiford writes:
Andreas Schwab writes:
Richard Sandiford writes:
/* Represents a test and the action that should be take
On 05/01/2015 05:27 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Tested with make gcc.pot.
Andreas.
PR translation/65959
* params.h (DEFPARAM): Rename msgid to nocmsgid.
OK.
jeff
On May 1, 2015 12:27:17 PM GMT+02:00, Eric Botcazou
wrote:
>> Hmm, special-casing this in the inliner looks odd to me. ISTR the
>inliner
>> already propagates constant parameters to immediate uses, so I guess
>> you run into the casting case you handle specially.
>
>Right on both counts, the ori
Hi all,
This patch adds a macro to wrap cost field accesses into a helpful debug dump,
saying which field is being accessed at what line and with what values.
This helped me track down cases where the costs were doing the wrong thing
by allowing me to see which path in arm_new_rtx_costs was taken
Hi all,
The new test case requires the target to support atomic operations on
"int" type. By adding the correct target selector, it fixes the
regression on arm-none-elf target.
Okay to commit?
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-05-01 Renlin Li
* gcc.dg/pr65345-2.c: Add sync_int_long tar
Hi all,
Like the subject says, struct attribute_spec is now defined in tree-core.h
rather than tree.h.
The patch updates the reference that I spotted.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
* target.def (attribute_table): Mention that struct attribute_spec
is defin
Sriraman Tallam writes:
>
> This comes with caveats. This cannot be generally done for all
> functions marked extern as it is impossible for the compiler to say if
> a function is "truly extern" (defined in a shared library). If a
> function is not truly extern(ends up defined in the final execu
On 05/01/2015 08:44 AM, Renlin Li wrote:
Hi all,
The new test case requires the target to support atomic operations on
"int" type. By adding the correct target selector, it fixes the
regression on arm-none-elf target.
Okay to commit?
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-05-01 Renlin Li
* g
On 01/05/15 14:45 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
Jonathan Wakely writes:
I've tested this on GNU/Linux and DragonFly BSD, but as it's probably
not going to build everywhere I've added the configure option
--enable-libstdcxx-filesystem-ts which defaults to enabled on GNU, BSD
and Solaris targets, an
Alan Lawrence wrote:
As per introduction, this allows vector_compare_rtx to work on DImode vectors.
Bootstrapped + check-gcc on x86-unknown-linux-gnu.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* optabs.c (vector_compare_rtx): Handle RTL operands having VOIDmode.
Ping. (DImode vectors are explicitly allowed by
Jonathan Wakely writes:
> Sorry about that, I'll add a check for fchmodat, in the meantime this
> will fix bootstrap. Committed as obvious.
>
>
> commit f4768ebcfd68e2fa6e4763d0b681e8fe710c64c4
> Author: Jonathan Wakely
> Date: Fri May 1 16:09:28 2015 +0100
>
> * acinclude.m4 (GLIBCXX_EN
On 04/30/2015 04:44 AM, Matthew Wahab wrote:
[added tags to subject]
Ping.
On 20/04/15 14:29, Matthew Wahab wrote:
Hello,
The documentation for the __atomic builtins isn't clear about their
expectations
and behaviour. In particular, assumptions about the C11/C++11
restrictions on
programs sho
On 1 May 2015 at 14:56, Yvan Roux wrote:
> 2015-05-01 Yvan Roux
>
> * configure.ac: Add --enable-fix-cortex-a53-843419 option.
> * configure: Regenerate.
> * config/aarch64/aarch64-elf-raw.h (CA53_ERR_843419_SPEC): Define.
> (LINK_SPEC): Include CA53_ERR_843419_SPEC.
>
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 12:03:35PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 09:25:21AM +, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/combine.c b/gcc/combine.c
> > index 5c763b4..945abdb 100644
> > --- a/gcc/combine.c
> > +++ b/gcc/combine.c
> > @@ -7703,8 +7703,6 @@ mak
The name of this alias template is a copy&paste error, it should be
_Alloc. Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk.
commit a772309ec9fc300e57edd750fa32b8320d68004a
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date: Fri May 1 16:12:16 2015 +0100
* include/bits/alloc_traits.h (__alloc_rebind): Change para
On 05/01/2015 08:51 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
Like the subject says, struct attribute_spec is now defined in
tree-core.h rather than tree.h.
The patch updates the reference that I spotted.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
* target.def (attribute_table):
Hi Marcus,
On 01/05/15 11:19, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 17:10, Renlin Li wrote:
Hi all,
This is a simple patch to generate a move instruction to temporarily hold
the large immediate for a add instruction.
GCC regression test has been run using aarch64-none-elf toolchain. NO
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:12 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> When bfd is configured as a shared library, we need to configure zlib
> with --enable-host-shared since zlib is used by bfd. Any comments,
> feedbacks, objections?
>
>
> H.J.
> --
> PR ld/18355
> * Makefile.def: Add extra_configure
On 01/05/15 16:22, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 05/01/2015 08:51 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
Like the subject says, struct attribute_spec is now defined in
tree-core.h rather than tree.h.
The patch updates the reference that I spotted.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tka
On 1 May 2015 at 16:30, Renlin Li wrote:
> Thank you, Marcus. I have updated the patch accordingly, please check..
>
> Regards,
> Renlin Li
OK, thanks /Marcus
Hi all,
GCC has some logic to expand calls to pow (x, 0.75), pow (0.25) and pow (x,
(int)k + 0.5)
using square roots. So, for the above examples it would generate sqrt (x) *
sqrt (sqrt (x)),
sqrt (sqrt (x)) and powi (x, k) * sqrt (x) (assuming k > 0. For k < 0 it will
calculate the
reciprocal
On 05/01/2015 08:51 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
Hi all,
Like the subject says, struct attribute_spec is now defined in
tree-core.h rather than tree.h.
The patch updates the reference that I spotted.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Kyrill
2015-05-01 Kyrylo Tkachov
* target.def (attribute_table):
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Sriraman Tallam writes:
>>
>> This comes with caveats. This cannot be generally done for all
>> functions marked extern as it is impossible for the compiler to say if
>> a function is "truly extern" (defined in a shared library). If a
>> funct
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> Sriraman Tallam writes:
>>>
>>> This comes with caveats. This cannot be generally done for all
>>> functions marked extern as it is impossible for the compiler to say if
>>> a functi
yes -- it is good to turn this on by default in LTO mode without
requiring user to specify the option.
David
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:23 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> Sriraman Tallam write
On 05/01/2015 09:12 AM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
Alan Lawrence wrote:
As per introduction, this allows vector_compare_rtx to work on DImode
vectors.
Bootstrapped + check-gcc on x86-unknown-linux-gnu.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* optabs.c (vector_compare_rtx): Handle RTL operands having VOIDmode.
Ping.
> Yeah, I think that's a way better place for the hack.
OK, how aggressive then? We could as well do the substitution for all copies:
/* For EXPAND_INITIALIZER try harder to get something simpler.
Otherwise, substitute copies on the RHS, this can propagate
constants at -O
Replace the private & unimplemented idiom with deleted functions when
available. This gives slightly better error messages (as well as
stricter conformance to the precise wording of the standard).
Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk.
commit dd256f9035b4e32f1bb53eaf82919b0b69c6c999
Author
2015-04-30 19:32 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Wakely :
> This is the complete implementation I intend
> to commit shortly. (It's also been pushed to the redi/filesystem-ts
> branch in the git mirror).
- There are three places where you refer to std::__addressof and one
where you refer to std::addressof. Is
On 29/04/15 17:18 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 29 April 2015 at 17:04, Doug Evans wrote:
Tested the same patch on the gcc 5.0 branch.
Just double checking ... ok to apply there too?
Yes, OK for the branch too.
btw, the test is currently marked as unsupported by the test run.
I don't know
OK (= true).
Jason
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Sriraman Tallam writes:
>>
>> This comes with caveats. This cannot be generally done for all
>> functions marked extern as it is impossible for the compiler to say if
>> a function is "truly extern" (defined in a shared library). If a
>> funct
On 01/05/15 19:03 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
- There are three places where you refer to std::__addressof and one
where you refer to std::addressof. Is this difference intentional?
No, I'll make them all use __addressof.
- I found all together six non-uglified usages of parameter name "rhs"
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> yes -- it is good to turn this on by default in LTO mode without
> requiring user to specify the option.
Yes, with LTO, we would exactly know what the "truly extern" functions
are and PLT stubs can be eliminated for all extern functions w
> OK, how aggressive then? We could as well do the substitution for all
> copies:
>
> /* For EXPAND_INITIALIZER try harder to get something simpler.
>Otherwise, substitute copies on the RHS, this can propagate
>constants at -O0 and thus simplify arithmetic operations. */
>
On 01/05/15 19:03 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
b/libstdc++-v3/src/filesystem/path.cc:
- path::compare(const path& p) const noexcept:
Shouldn't the implementation of this noexcept function not try to
create copies of path objects? Couldn't _Cmpt just hold references to
_M_pathname?
All your ot
The TLS testcase needs to add target-specific TLS options.
Committed as obvious.
* gcc.dg/debug/pr65771.c: Add "dg-add-options tls".
Index: debug/pr65771.c
===
--- debug/pr65771.c (revision 222680)
+++ debug/pr65771.c
Dear All,
By the time I went to commit, something had changed and the patch
caused a regression. I presume that the version that I had of Andre's
patch was not the same as the one committed. I'll cast an eye over it
this weekend and see if I can understand what gives.
Cheers
paul
On 27 April 20
On 01/21/2015 03:49 AM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
gcc.dg/20150120-1.c: New test
Rounding an integer to the next even integer is sometimes written x +=
x & 1. The equivalent x = (x+1)&~1 usually uses one less register, and
in practical cases only the new value of x will be used (making it
unlikely
On 01/21/2015 03:49 AM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
gcc.dg/20150120-2.c: New test
Clearing a certain subset of bits, for example to round down x to a
multiple of a power of 2, is sometimes written x & ~(x & y), where y
may or may not be a constant. It is shorter to use x & ~y,
particularly when y is
It looks like things are coming together pretty well. What's your
feeling about readiness to merge into the trunk? Is the branch down to
no regressions?
See you on Monday!
@@ -4146,21 +4146,21 @@ build_new_function_call (tree fn, vec
**args, bool koenig_p,
if (TREE_CODE (fn) == TEMP
On 04/30/2015 03:38 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
On 04/30/2015 01:17 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
+/* This is another case of narrowing, specifically when there's an
outer
+ BIT_AND_EXPR which masks off bits outside the type of the innermost
+ operands. Like the
On 04/28/2015 03:54 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 27/04/15 21:13, Jeff Law wrote:
On 04/21/2015 11:33 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 21/04/15 15:09, Jeff Law wrote:
On 04/21/2015 02:30 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
From reading config/stormy16/stormy-abi it seems to me that we
don't
pass argumen
On 04/30/2015 05:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
I have in my local dev tree (so completely untested...)
@@ -1040,31 +1052,22 @@ (define_operator_list CBRT BUILT_IN_CBRT
operation and convert the
> It looks like things are coming together pretty well. What's your feeling
> about readiness to merge into the trunk? Is the branch down to no
> regressions?
They are coming together pretty well. We have one major unit test
failure involving template introductions (Braden is working on it),
one
2015-05-01 20:22 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Wakely :
> On 01/05/15 19:03 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
>>
>> b/libstdc++-v3/src/filesystem/path.cc:
>>
>> - path::compare(const path& p) const noexcept:
>>
>> Shouldn't the implementation of this noexcept function not try to
>> create copies of path objects? C
On 01/05/15 21:28 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
2015-05-01 20:22 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Wakely :
On 01/05/15 19:03 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
b/libstdc++-v3/src/filesystem/path.cc:
- path::compare(const path& p) const noexcept:
Shouldn't the implementation of this noexcept function not try to
c
On 01/05/15 11:53 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/05/15 10:05 +0900, Luke Allardyce wrote:
This fails on mingw-w64 4.02 due to
Yay, thanks for trying it!
an extra typename:
/mnt/build/native/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/libstdc++-v3/include/experimental/fs_path.h:784:35:
error: expected neste
On 01/05/15 20:38 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/05/15 21:28 +0200, Daniel Krügler wrote:
But if I read your implementation of path::compare(const path& p)
correctly it *also* may allocate memory by copying _M_pathname into a
_Cmpt object.
Yes, I agree that there's a bug here that could c
Re https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01510.html :
On 04/15/2015 10:42 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
It looks very sane to me. This is probably how the AVR and CR16 should
have been handled to begin with IMHO.
FWIW, I generally discourage ports overriding default options, but this
is a case w
On 01/05/15 16:37 +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
Tested on Linux-x64.
Implement observer_ptr.
Thanks! Committed with some minor formatting changes.
I've also committed this to add feature-test macros and update the
docs. Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk.
commit 2606fe2072160
Hello,
Le 30/04/2015 20:19, Mikael Morin a écrit :
>>> As you may want to simplify in the limited scope of the matmul inlining,
>>> I'm giving comments about the patch (otherwise you can ignore them):
>>> - No need to check for allocatable or pointer, it should be excluded by
>>> as->type == AS_A
On 01/05/15 22:01 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 01/05/15 16:37 +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
Tested on Linux-x64.
Implement observer_ptr.
Thanks! Committed with some minor formatting changes.
I've also committed this to add feature-test macros and update the
docs. Tested powerpc64le-l
On Sun, 31 Aug 2014, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> I have committed the attached patch. Comment and suggestions are welcome!
I applied the small follow-up below.
What I am struggling to understand, though, is the following piece:
Full experimental support of Fortran 2008's coarrays with
-fcoarray
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Yunlian Jiang wrote:
> I believe this is the same problem as
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-07/msg00292.html
>
> The asprinf declaration is messed up when using clang to build gdb.
>
> diff --git a/include/libiberty.h b/include/libiberty.h
> index b33dd
Hello,
this patch tries to tighten a bit the range estimate for x%y. slp-perm-7.c
started failing by vectorizing more than expected, I assumed it was a good
thing and updated the test. I am less conservative than Jakub with
division by 0, but I still don't really understand how empty ranges ar
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
