On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this is updated patch I am going to commit. As discussed, we also need to
> match
> non-empty CONSTRUCTOR of vectors, but those should never be having CONSTANT
> flags
> set, so they need care in the other path trhough operand_equal_p, so I will
On Thu, 22 Oct 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this patch adds matching of non-constant CONSTRUCTOR expressions into
> operand_equal_p. As discussed with Richard, those can happen when we are
> building vectors out of components. I also added a testcase that triggers
> this
> path and gets fold
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 10/21/2015 03:37 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On 10/20/2015 03:27 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>>
>>> ---
>>> gcc/cselib.c | 22
>>> +-
>>> gcc/fold-const.c
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> This patch implements a new internal function that has a 'uniqueness'
> property. Jump-threading cannot clone it and tail-merging cannot combine
> multiple instances.
>
> The uniqueness is implemented by a new gimple fn,
> gimple_call_inte
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> This patch implements a new internal function that has a 'uniqueness'
>> property. Jump-threading cannot clone it and tail-merging cannot combine
>> multiple instances.
>>
>> The u
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 06:22:37PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> On 10/21/2015 06:18 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> >To avoid conditionally compiled code. I'm of the opinion we should be
>> >stomping out as much as we reasonably can.
>>
>> Yeah, I
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Sandra Loosemore
wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 03:27 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>
>>
>> +@deftypefn {Target Hook} bool TARGET_ADDR_SPACE_ZERO_ADDRESS_VALID
>> (addr_space_t @var{as})
>> +Define this to modify the default handling of address 0 for the
>> +address space.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:49:29AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> Jakub, IYR I originally had IFN_FORK and IFN_JOIN as such distinct internal
> >> fns. This replaces that scheme.
> >>
> >> ok?
> >
> > Hmm, I'd just have used gimple_has_volatile_ops on the call? That
> > should have the
> > des
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:00:47PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> To distinguish different uses of the UNIQUE function, I use the first
> argument, which is expected to be an INTEGER_CST. I figured this better
> than using multiple new internal fns, all with the unique property, as the
> latter wo
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:49:29AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>> >> Jakub, IYR I originally had IFN_FORK and IFN_JOIN as such distinct
>> >> internal
>> >> fns. This replaces that scheme.
>> >>
>> >> ok?
>> >
>> > Hmm, I'd just have used
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:00:47PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> To distinguish different uses of the UNIQUE function, I use the first
>> argument, which is expected to be an INTEGER_CST. I figured this better
>> than using multiple new i
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:09:55PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Bernd, any comments?
Just a few questions, otherwise it is a PTX territory you PTX maintainers
should review.
> (*oacc_ntid_insn, oacc_ntid, *oacc_tid_insn, oacc_tid): Delete.
Extra space.
> +/* Size of buffer needed to br
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:13:26PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> 2015-10-20 Nathan Sidwell
>
> * target.def (fork_join): New GOACC hook.
> * targhooks.h (default_goacc_fork_join): Declare.
> * omp-low.c (default_goacc_forkjoin): New.
> * doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_GOACC_FOR
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:16:20PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> 2015-10-20 Cesar Philippidis
> Thomas Schwinge
> James Norris
> Joseph Myers
> Julian Brown
>
> * c-parser.c (c_parser_oacc_shape_clause): New.
> (c_parser_oacc_simple_c
Committed to head and GCC 5 branch
gcc/ChangeLog:
2015-10-22 Andreas Krebbel
PR target/68015
* config/s390/s390.md (movcc): Emit compare only if we don't
already have a comparison result.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
2015-10-22 Andreas Krebbel
PR target/68015
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, the OMP changes
were approved by Jakub on IRC.
Richard.
2015-10-22 Richard Biener
* fold-const.c (fold_addr_of_array_ref_difference): Properly
convert operands before folding a MINUS_EXPR.
(fold_binary_loc): Move si
+ /* Changes in machine mode are never useless conversions unless. */
Unless what?
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:18:55PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> This patch is the C++ changes matching the C ones of patch 4. In
> finish_omp_clauses, the gang, worker, & vector clauses are handled the same
> as OpenMP's 'num_threads' clause. One change to num_threads is the
> augmentation of a
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:24:13PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> 2015-10-20 Nathan Sidwell
>
> * omp-low.c (oacc_init_rediction_array): New.
> (oacc_initialize_reduction_data): Initialize array.
Ok.
Jakub
Hi Tom!
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:17:25 +0200, Tom de Vries wrote:
> this patch checks for occurance of oacc offload regions in oacc routines
> (which means nested parallelism, which is currently not supported) and
> gives an appropriate error message.
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:42:26PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> +/* Flags for an OpenACC loop. */
> +
> +enum oacc_loop_flags
> + {
Weird formatting. I see either
enum foobarbaz {
e1 = ...,
e2 = ...
};
or
enum foobarbaz
{
e1 = ...,
e2 = ...
};
styles being used heavily, but not this
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:49:08PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> This patch is the device-specific half of the previous patch. It processes
> the partition head & tail markers and loop abstraction functions inserted
> during omp lowering.
>
> In the oacc_device_lower pass we scan the CFG reconst
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:50:31PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> This patch is obvious, but included for completeness. We always want to run
> the device lowering pass (when openacc is enabled), in order to delete the
> marker and loop functions that should never be seen after this point.
>
>
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:51:42PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Here's another obvious patch. The ptx plugin no longer needs to barf on
> gang or worker dimensions of non-unity.
>
> nathan
>
>
> 2015-10-20 Nathan Sidwell
>
> * plugin/plugin-nvptx.c (nvptx_exec): Remove check on com
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:53:17PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> This patch has some new execution tests, verifying loop partitioning is
> behaving as expected.
>
> There are more execution tests on the gomp4 branch, but many of them use
> reductions. We'll merge those once reductions are merged
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 06:18:25PM +0300, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>
> > On 10/20/2015 08:34 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > > This patch series ports enough of libgomp.c to get warp-level parallelism
> > > working for OpenMP offloading. The overall ap
On 10/22/2015 10:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
@@ -2129,6 +3242,19 @@ nvptx_file_end (void)
FOR_EACH_HASH_TABLE_ELEMENT (*needed_fndecls_htab, decl, tree, iter)
nvptx_record_fndecl (decl, true);
fputs (func_decls.str().c_str(), asm_out_file);
+
+ if (worker_bcast_hwm)
+{
+
> Eventually we'll get another testcase so I'll leave this for
> comments a while and will commit somewhen later this week.
In case you're referring to my attempt to port the test case to
x86: All the efforts to reproduce the bug on x86 have failed so
far. It seems that Gcc is much better in han
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html states
"If you do not have write access and a patch of yours has been approved, but
not committed, please advise the approver of that fact. You may want to point
out lack of write access in your initial submission, too.”
Should I apply for svn write access? A
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-1.c -O0 (internal compiler error)
$ gcc/xgcc -Bgcc/ -w -c ../gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-1.c
../gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-1.c: In function ‘f4’:
../gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-1.c:31:1: error: position plus
s
Martin,
some subdirectories have their own ChangeLog file so you need to move...
> 2015-10-21 Martin Sebor
>
> PR driver/68043
> * opts.c (undocumented_msg, use_diagnosed_msg): New globals.
> (print_filtered_help): Reference aliased option's name and encourage
>
2015-10-22 13:13 GMT+03:00 Andreas Schwab :
> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-1.c -O0 (internal compiler error)
Can't reproduce it on i386. What's config used?
Ilya
2015-10-21 20:25 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law :
> On 10/08/2015 08:52 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This series introduces autogeneration of vector comparison and its support
>> on i386 target. It lets comparison statements to be vectorized into vector
>> comparison instead of VEC_COND_EXPR. Thi
Ilya Enkovich writes:
> 2015-10-22 13:13 GMT+03:00 Andreas Schwab :
>> FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/pr54713-1.c -O0 (internal compiler error)
>
> Can't reproduce it on i386. What's config used?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-10/msg02350.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/20
On 21/10/15 23:45, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Kugan
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 07/09/15 12:53, Kugan wrote:
>>>
>>> This a new version of the patch posted in
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00226.html. I have done
>>> more testing and spitted the patch
This moves the fold rules for trunc, floor, ceil, round, nearbyint and
rint in one go, since they're tested as a group. Most of the code is
supporting the f(x)->x fold when x is known to be integer-valued.
Like with the non-negative test, this is probably more elegantly handled
by tracking range i
On 10/21/2015 04:06 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> On 10/21/2015 11:59 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 10/20/2015 03:39 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:00 PM,
On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:05:30 +0200
Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:49:29AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> >> >> Jakub, IYR I originally had IFN_FORK and IFN_JOIN as such
> >> >> distinct internal fns. This replaces
This splits out the non-constant folding part of an earlier approved patch
to make -ftrapv work better.
The constant folding case is still broken (also ubsan doesn't handle it
correctly).
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2015-10-22 Richard Biene
Hello,
On 15 Oct 17:47, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
> On 15 Oct 16:39, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 05:33:32PM +0300, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> > > --- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
> > > +++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
> > > @@ -3066,6 +3066,20 @@ This function attribute make a stack prote
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> This moves the fold rules for trunc, floor, ceil, round, nearbyint and
> rint in one go, since they're tested as a group. Most of the code is
> supporting the f(x)->x fold when x is known to be integer-valued.
> Like with the non-negativ
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 05:02:42PM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote:
> >So why does add_new_function not do the dumping and to the correct
> >place? That is,
> >you are dumping things twice here, once in omp expansion and then again when
> >the
> >new function reaches omp expansion?
> >
>
> Dumping twi
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:55 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 10/21/2015 03:56 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Kugan
>>> wrote:
On 07/09/15 12:53, Kugan wrote:
>
>
>>>
On Thu, 22 Oct 2015, Kirill Yukhin wrote:
> Ping?
You need to update this patch to take account of Marek's fix for bug 67964
(it was because I was suspicious of the "continue;" in this patch
accepting invalid syntax that I found that bug), retest and resubmit.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codeso
On 10/22/15 05:23, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:42:26PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+/* Flags for an OpenACC loop. */
+
+enum oacc_loop_flags
+ {
Weird formatting. I see either
Blame emacs (I thought it was configured for GNU formatting ...)
+ expr = build2 (
On 22/10/15 14:27, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
The state before the patch is:
1) the omp_fn children created during the pre-SSA ompexp pass are dumped
first in the *.ssa dump and in all the following ones (these are created
as low gimple, non-SSA)
Hi,
I do see those child fns before the ssa d
On 10/22/15 05:31, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:49:08PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
So, how do you expand the OACC loops on non-PTX devices (host, or say
XeonPhi)? Do you drop the IFNs and replace stuff with normal loops?
On a non ptx target (canonical example being the
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 08:50:23AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >>+ expr = build2 (TRUNC_MOD_EXPR, ivar_type, ivar,
> >>+fold_convert (ivar_type, collapse->iters));
> >>+ expr = build2 (MULT_EXPR, diff_type, fold_convert (diff_type, expr),
> >>+collapse->
On 10/22/15 04:07, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Do you have to scan the whole bb? E.g. don't or should not those
unique IFNs force end of bb?
Yeah, please make them either end or start a BB so we have to check
at most a single stmt. ECF_RETU
On 10/22/15 05:55, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/22/2015 10:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
So, is the worker broadcast buffer effectively a file scope .shared
variable? My worry is that as .shared is quite limited resource, if you
compile many TUs and each allocates its own broadcast buffer you run
On 10/22/15 08:59, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 08:50:23AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+ expr = build2 (TRUNC_MOD_EXPR, ivar_type, ivar,
+fold_convert (ivar_type, collapse->iters));
+ expr = build2 (MULT_EXPR, diff_type, fold_convert (diff_type, exp
On 10/22/15 07:10, Julian Brown wrote:
On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:05:30 +0200
Richard Biener wrote:
So you'd need to be more precise as to what properties you are trying
to preserve by placing a single stmt somewhere.
FWIW an earlier, abandoned attempt at solving the same problem was
discussed
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 02:51:34PM +0200, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 22/10/15 14:27, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >The state before the patch is:
> >1) the omp_fn children created during the pre-SSA ompexp pass are dumped
> >first in the *.ssa dump and in all the following ones (these are created
> >
On 10/22/15 04:15, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:13:26PM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+/* Determine whether fork & joins are needed. */
+
+static bool
+nvptx_xform_fork_join (gcall *call, const int dims[],
+ bool ARG_UNUSED (is_fork))
Why is this not c
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:08:30AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 10/22/15 07:10, Julian Brown wrote:
> >On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:05:30 +0200
> >Richard Biener wrote:
>
> >>So you'd need to be more precise as to what properties you are trying
> >>to preserve by placing a single stmt somewhere.
>
On 10/22/15 09:01, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 10/22/15 05:55, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/22/2015 10:12 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
So, is the worker broadcast buffer effectively a file scope .shared
variable? My worry is that as .shared is quite limited resource, if you
compile many TUs and each
From: Jiangjiji
* gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.opt: Add a new option.
* gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c: Add some new functions and Macros.
* gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.h: Modify PROFILE_HOOK and FUNCTION_PROFILER.
Signed-off-by: Jiangjiji
Signed-off-by: Li Bin
---
gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c |
On 10/22/15 09:17, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:08:30AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
I agree with Richard that it would be better to write more about what kind
of IL changes are acceptable with IFN_UNIQUE in the IL and what are not.
E.g. is inlining ok (I'd hope yes)? Is fu
This makes the vectorizer use strided accesses when single-element
interleaving fails.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
Richard.
2015-10-22 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/19049
PR tree-optimization/65962
* tree-vect-data-ref
I've had a patch in my dev tree for quite a while that lowers uniform
vector stmts to scalar stmts. This also mitigates PR58497 so I decided
to push it out now.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2015-10-22 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/584
On 22 October 2015 at 14:21, Li Bin wrote:
> From: Jiangjiji
>
> * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.opt: Add a new option.
> * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c: Add some new functions and Macros.
> * gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.h: Modify PROFILE_HOOK and FUNCTION_PROFILER.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiangjiji
> Si
On 10/22/15 05:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
And, I must say I'm at least missing testcases that check parsing but also
runtime behavior of the vector or worker clause arguments (there
is one gang (static:1) clause, but not the other clauses nor other styles of
gang arguments.
the static clause is
On 10/22/15 04:07, Richard Biener wrote:
Yeah, please make them either end or start a BB so we have to check
at most a single stmt. ECF_RETURNS_TWICE should achieve that,
it also makes it a code motion barrier.
Just so I'm clear, you're not saying that RETURNS_TWICE will stop the call being
On 10/21/2015 09:09 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
At the beginning of a partitioned region, we have to propagate live
register state and stack frame from engine-zero to the other engines
(just as would happen on a regular 'fork' call).
This is something I'm not terribly happy about, but since I ha
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:53:46AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 10/22/15 05:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> >And, I must say I'm at least missing testcases that check parsing but also
> >runtime behavior of the vector or worker clause arguments (there
> >is one gang (static:1) clause, but not th
Hi Guys,
Sometimes gcc can generate instructions out of order with respect to
lines of source code, and this can lead to problems for debuggers.
For example, consider this source code snippet:
v = 0; /* Line 31 */
goto b;/* Line 32 */
a: v++;
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:44:56 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:38:10 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> >> > H.J.,
> >> > Maybe linker should print some warning about joini
Hi Nick,
On 10/22/2015 04:07 PM, Nick Clifton wrote:
Sometimes gcc can generate instructions out of order with respect to
lines of source code, and this can lead to problems for debuggers.
For example, consider this source code snippet:
v = 0; /* Line 31 */
Just one very small point...
On 19/10/15 09:17, Alan Hayward wrote:
> - if (check_reduction
> - && (!commutative_tree_code (code) || !associative_tree_code (code)))
> + if (check_reduction)
> {
> - if (dump_enabled_p ())
> -report_vect_op (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, def_st
Richard Henderson wrote:
> So you would recommend continuing to use address_class for these x86 segments?
Yes, I think so. As far as I can see, this would simply require to define two
address_class values to correspond to __seg_fs and __seg_gs. (These choices
should best be documented in the pl
Hi Bernd,
Could you point me at the code generating these NOPs
It is in cfgrtl.c:fixup_reorder_chain()
nb = split_edge (e);
if (!INSN_P (BB_END (nb)))
BB_END (nb) = emit_insn_after_noloc (gen_nop (), BB_END (nb),
nb
On 22/10/2015 15:15, "Alan Lawrence" wrote:
>Just one very small point...
>
>On 19/10/15 09:17, Alan Hayward wrote:
>
> > - if (check_reduction
> > - && (!commutative_tree_code (code) || !associative_tree_code
>(code)))
> > + if (check_reduction)
> > {
> > - if (dump_enabled_p
On 10/22/15 10:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:53:46AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 10/22/15 05:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
And, I must say I'm at least missing testcases that check parsing but also
runtime behavior of the vector or worker clause arguments (there
is one gan
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Kugan
wrote:
>
>
> On 21/10/15 23:45, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:03 PM, Kugan
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 07/09/15 12:53, Kugan wrote:
This a new version of the patch posted in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg002
On 10/22/15 10:04, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
+ if (par->mask & GOMP_DIM_MASK (GOMP_DIM_MAX))
+{ /* No propagation needed for a call. */ }
+ else if (par->mask & GOMP_DIM_MASK (GOMP_DIM_WORKER))
Ok that looks weird with the open brace on the line before the else. I think the
standard practice
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 10/22/15 04:07, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> Yeah, please make them either end or start a BB so we have to check
>> at most a single stmt. ECF_RETURNS_TWICE should achieve that,
>> it also makes it a code motion barrier.
>
>
> Just so I'm
On 10/22/2015 04:24 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+ else
+{ /* Parent will skip this parallel itself. */ }
Here too - actually no need to have an empty else at all.
I wanted somewhere clear for the comment to go. (Actually, I think this
is the one the compiler warns about -- empty dangl
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 10/22/15 09:17, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:08:30AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
>
>> I agree with Richard that it would be better to write more about what kind
>> of IL changes are acceptable with IFN_UNIQUE i
On 10/22/15 10:26, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
RETURNS_TWICE will make the invariant motion stop at UNIQUE (HEAD),
but it would have done that anyway. It will also be a CSE barrier, thus
tem = global;
UNIQUE(HEAD)
tem2 = global;
will not CSE
Dear All,
This patch speaks for itself. It is by no means as comprehensive as
the work on ALLOCATE that Andre has done on 6 branch but has the
advantage for 5 branch that it is simple and steers the failing code
to the standard assignment, which should be safe.
Bootstraps and regtests on FC21/x86
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 04:28:17PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 10/22/2015 04:24 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >>>+ else
> >>>+{ /* Parent will skip this parallel itself. */ }
> >>
> >>Here too - actually no need to have an empty else at all.
> >
> >I wanted somewhere clear for the comm
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:44:56 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:38:10 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
>> >> > H.J.
On 10/22/15 10:28, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 10/22/2015 04:24 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
+ else
+{ /* Parent will skip this parallel itself. */ }
Here too - actually no need to have an empty else at all.
I wanted somewhere clear for the comment to go. (Actually, I think this
is the on
On 10/22/15 10:30, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Essentially, yes. a set of IFN_UNIQUE form a group which must not be
separated from each other. The set is discovered implicitly by following
the CFG (though I suppose we could add an identifyin
On 10/22/2015 07:23 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 10/22/15 10:05, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 09:53:46AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>>> On 10/22/15 05:37, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
And, I must say I'm at least missing testcases that check parsing
but also
runtim
On 10/22/15 10:32, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
There is a warning for
if (cond);
but not for
if (cond)
;
or
if (cond)
/* comment */ ;
which is the style used in various places throughout the compiler.
Sadly, that's not quite accurate. The warning occurs for all the empty if's you
On 10/22/15 10:47, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
Interesting question. The spec is unclear. It defines gang, worker and
vector as follows in section 2.7 in the OpenACC 2.0a spec:
gang [( gang-arg-list )]
worker [( [num:] int-expr )]
vector [( [length:] int-expr )]
where gang-arg is one of:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:47:01AM -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> > But it is unclear from the parsing what from these is allowed:
>
> int v, w;
> ...
> gang(26) // equivalent to gang(num:26)
> gang(v) // gang(num:v)
> vector(length: 16) // vector(length: 16)
> vector(length: v) // vector(
On Mon, 2015-10-19 at 16:51 +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> > This fixes much of the bloat seen for influence.i when sending ranges
> > through for every token.
>
> Yeah, I think that's on the right track.
Thanks.
> > This was with 8 bits al
On 10/22/2015 08:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:47:01AM -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
>>> But it is unclear from the parsing what from these is allowed:
>>
>> int v, w;
>> ...
>> gang(26) // equivalent to gang(num:26)
>> gang(v) // gang(num:v)
>> vector(length: 16) /
On closer inspection I think you can also remove this guy (from loongson.md):
(define_insn "reduc_uplus_v8qi"
[(set (match_operand:V8QI 0 "register_operand" "=f")
(unspec:V8QI [(match_operand:V8QI 1 "register_operand" "f")]
UNSPEC_LOONGSON_BIADD))]
"TARGET_HARD_FL
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 07:35:55 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:44:56 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:38:10 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> >> O
On 10/22/2015 04:19 PM, Nick Clifton wrote:
It is in cfgrtl.c:fixup_reorder_chain()
nb = split_edge (e);
if (!INSN_P (BB_END (nb)))
BB_END (nb) = emit_insn_after_noloc (gen_nop (), BB_END (nb),
nb);
INSN_LOCATION (BB_END (nb)) = e->goto_lo
On 10/22/2015 05:08 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
So I'm not entirely sure yet what's supposed to happen here, but I think
the problem could well be in the expansion phase.
Forgot to mention another possibility that crossed my mind: don't
compare locations for equality in fixup_reorder_chain, inst
Currently, for certain omp and oacc errors the fortran will inaccurately
report exactly where in the omp/acc construct the error has occurred. E.g.
!$acc parallel copy (i) copy (i) copy (j)
1
Error: Symbol ‘i’ present on multiple clauses at (1)
instea
Hi,
I had to interrupt my porting to OpenMP 4.5 to fix this bug. We were
not copying the distribute loop pre-body to before target, thus
setting the grid size of quite a few kernels to bogus values. Fixed
thusly and committed to the branch.
Thanks,
Martin
2015-10-22 Martin Jambor
Hi!
Currently -fsched-verbose option redirects debugging dumps to stderr
if there is no dump_file for the current pass. It would be fine if
there were the only scheduling pass. But for example for AArch64
there are 3 scheduling passes in the default pipeline: sched1,
fusion and sched2. So, when p
On 10/22/2015 04:35 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
2015-10-21 20:25 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law :
On 10/08/2015 08:52 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Hi,
This series introduces autogeneration of vector comparison and its support
on i386 target. It lets comparison statements to be vectorized into vector
comparison
On 10/22/2015 05:38 PM, Nikolai Bozhenov wrote:
Currently -fsched-verbose option redirects debugging dumps to stderr
if there is no dump_file for the current pass. It would be fine if
there were the only scheduling pass. But for example for AArch64
there are 3 scheduling passes in the default pi
Hi Guys,
I am checking in the patch below to allow gcc to pass the new MSP430
-msilicon-errata and -msilicon-errata-warn option on to the
assembler.
Cheers
Nick
gcc/ChangeLog
2015-10-22 Nick Clifton
* config/msp430/msp430.opt: Add -msilicon-errata and
-msilicon-errata
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
