On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 12.10.2015 12:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > This backports the patch to allow bootstrapping with ISL 0.15 to the
> > GCC 5 branch (the GCC 4.9 branch will require backporting of some
> > dependencies).
>
> I don't think so. 4.8 and 4.9 don't us
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 13/11/15 08:41, Richard Biener wrote:
> >
> > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk.
> >
> > Richard.
> >
> > 2015-11-13 Richard Biener
> >
> > * tree-vect-loop.c (vect_analyze_loop_2): Add fatal parameter.
>
Hi!
Since the last sanitizer library merge to GCC happened, some new useful
features were applied upstream. In particular, the most significant are:
* The shadow offset for ASan was unified on Aarch64 for 39 and 42 VMAs
(http://reviews.llvm.org/D13782). AFAU, this change wouldn't require any
I'm reverting an earlier change removing the redirect_edge_var_map_destroy
call from delete_tree_ssa.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied.
Richard.
2015-11-19 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/68117
* tree-ssa.c (delete_tree_ssa): Revert removal of call t
On 11/19/2015 11:36 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Nov 19, 2015 12:19 AM, "Maxim Ostapenko"
wrote:
Hi!
Since the last sanitizer library merge to GCC happened, some new useful
features were applied upstream. In particular, the most significant are:
* The shadow offset for ASan was unified on A
On 17/11/15 23:20, Tom de Vries wrote:
[ was: Re: [PATCH, 10/16] Add pass_oacc_kernels pass group in passes.def ]
Hi,
Consider test-case test.c, with a use of the final value of the
iteration variable (return i):
...
unsigned int
foo (int *a, unsigned int n)
{
unsigned int i;
for (i = 0;
On 11/19/2015 01:50 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
I don't think all the reformattings here are things we want to do globally
for most source files. E.g.
@@ -75,18 +74,17 @@ get_mask_first_set_bit (unsigned mask)
static bool
has_undefined_value_p (tree t)
{
- return (ssa_undefined_value_p (t)
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:19:23AM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Since the last sanitizer library merge to GCC happened, some new useful
> features were applied upstream. In particular, the most significant are:
>
> * The shadow offset for ASan was unified on Aarch64 for 39 and 42 VMAs
Hi all,
In this PR we end up removing a widening multiplication. I suspect it's some
path in combine
that doesn't handle the case where we return clobber of 0 properly. This
started with my recent
combine patch r230326.
Changing the subst hunk from that patch to just return x when handling a no
On 19/11/15 13:18, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:19:23AM +0300, Maxim Ostapenko wrote:
Hi!
Since the last sanitizer library merge to GCC happened, some new useful
features were applied upstream. In particular, the most significant are:
* The shadow offset for ASan was unified
On 18/11/15 09:11, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 17/11/15 23:11, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 11/17/2015 02:03 PM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
+ || !reg_overlap_mentioned_p (tmp_reg, SET_SRC (PATTERN (cand->insn
return false;
Well, I think the statement we want to make is
"return false from
On 16/11/15 13:45, Richard Biener wrote:
I've eliminated all the uses for pass_tree_loop_init/pass_tree_loop_done in
>the pass group. Instead, I've added conditional loop optimizer setup in:
>- pass_lim and pass_scev_cprop (added in this patch), and
Reposting the "Add pass_oacc_kernels pass gr
On 11/19/2015 12:09 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
Martin, thanks for getting this patch out. I like the patch.
Jeff, clang-format has scripts that allow formatting only the lines
touched by a patch.
It also has a script to integrate with git:
https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/tools/clang-fo
Hi Kyrill,
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:26:25AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> In this PR we end up removing a widening multiplication. I suspect it's
> some path in combine
> that doesn't handle the case where we return clobber of 0 properly.
That is troublesome. Could you look deeper?
> This
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:02:01AM -0800, Cesar Philippidis wrote:
> static inline void
> cp_ensure_no_oacc_routine (cp_parser *parser)
> {
> - cp_finalize_oacc_routine (parser, NULL_TREE, false, true);
> + if (parser->oacc_routine && !parser->oacc_routine->error_seen)
> +{
> + tree c
This is the breakage of the init_priority attribute on sparc-elf, a regression
from older releases in the 4.x series.
Tested on sparc-elf, applied on all active branches.
2015-11-19 Eric Botcazou
PR target/68408
* config/sparc/sp-elf.h (CTORS_SECTION_ASM_OP): Undefine.
Hi,
this fixes the glitch I introduced when trying to fix another bug:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00330.html
The --with-plugin-ld value specified by the user is also stripped, although
that's unnecessay to fix the original bug. So I guess that we can leave this
value alone,
Hi Andrew,
On 17/11/15 22:10, Andrew Pinski wrote:
To Add support for -mcpu=thunderxt88pass1, I needed to fix up a few
things in the support for -mcpu=native. First was I wanted to do the same
cleanup that was done for some of the other .def files and move the
#undef into the .def files instead
On 11/19/2015 01:02 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
this fixes the glitch I introduced when trying to fix another bug:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg00330.html
The --with-plugin-ld value specified by the user is also stripped, although
that's unnecessay to fix the original bug. So I
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 06:19:29PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 17:28:25 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 05:04:47PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > > On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:41:30 +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 13:09:19 +01
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 02:52:55AM +, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> static bool
> error_jumpto (diagnostic_t kind, location_t loc, tree decl)
> {
> bool complained = (decl
>? emit_diagnostic (kind, input_location, 0,
> "jump to label %q
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 04:22:21PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 11/18/2015 03:52 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >If changing at_eof for this is too big hack, perhaps we could have a
> >different bool just to affect the mangling aliases (and set it to true
> >in generate_mangling_aliases or so).
>
On 11/19/2015 11:40 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 12:09 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>> Martin, thanks for getting this patch out. I like the patch.
>> Jeff, clang-format has scripts that allow formatting only the lines
>> touched by a patch.
>> It also has a script to integrate with git:
>>
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:47:47PM +, Julian Brown wrote:
The FE/gimplifier part is okay, but I really don't like the
omp-low.c changes, mostly the *lookup_decl_in_outer_ctx* changes.
If I count well, we have right now 27 maybe_lookup_decl_in_outer_ctx
callers and 7 lookup_decl_in_outer_ctx ca
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 08:33:28PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> diff --git a/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> b/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> index 772e198..6ee585e 100644
> --- a/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> +++ b/liboffloadmic/plugin/li
This patch broke bootstrap when ISL is not enabled.
graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c is protected by HAVE_isl but
get_false_edge_from_guard_bb() is used outside of Graphite, including
sese.c, which is not restricted to HAVE_isl.
Please fix.
Thanks, David
On 19/11/15 10:57, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi Kyrill,
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:26:25AM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
In this PR we end up removing a widening multiplication. I suspect it's
some path in combine
that doesn't handle the case where we return clobber of 0 properly.
That is trou
On 11/11/15 11:58, Richard Biener wrote:
On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:35, Tom de Vries wrote:
Hi,
this patch series for stage1 trunk adds support to:
- parallelize oacc kernels regions using parloops, and
- map the loops onto the oacc gang dimension.
The patch serie
On 11/19/2015 11:16 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
You are right, however as the original coding style was really broken,
it was much easier
to use the tool and clean-up fall-out.
Waiting for thoughts related to v2.
Better, but still some oddities. I hope you won't get mad at me if I
suggest doing t
Hi,
This is a refactoring patch discussed in another thread [1]. It gets rid of
CODE_FOR_nothing usage in optabs-tree.c by introducing boolean predicated in
optabs-query. Bootstrapped and regtesed on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Thanks,
Ilya
[1] - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg0
On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:13:45 +0100
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:47:47PM +, Julian Brown wrote:
>
> The FE/gimplifier part is okay, but I really don't like the
> omp-low.c changes, mostly the *lookup_decl_in_outer_ctx* changes.
> If I count well, we have right now 27 mayb
Hello.
In last two weeks I've removed couple of memory leaks, mainly tight to
middle-end.
Currently, a user of the GCC compiler can pass '--enable-checking=valgrind'
configure option
that will run all commands within valgrind environment, but as the valgrind
runs just with '-q' option,
the resu
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 01:38:53PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> >That is troublesome. Could you look deeper?
>
> Yes.
Thanks.
> So the bad case is when we're in subst and returning a CLOBBER of zero
> and 'from' is (reg/v:SI 80 [ x ]) and 'to' is (zero_extend:SI (reg:HI 0 x0
> [ x ])).
> The
This fixes an issue where the return type of an auto-deduced function
gets classified as a parameter pack if it's called in a decltype
expression inside of a type expansion.
The solution is to turn off the predicate type_pack_expansion_p when
traversing a decltype expression to disable the classif
The atomic instructions can take immediate operands. Applied to trunk.
nathan
2015-11-19 Nathan Sidwell
* config/nvptx/nvptx.md (atomic_compare_and_swap_1,
atomic_exchange): Input values can be immediates.
Index: gcc/config/nvptx/nvptx.md
This fixes a failure to optimize division by an unsigned. The comment before
the condition I'm fixing says "When vr0.max < 0, vr1.min != 0 and ..." but
"&& !compare_values (vr1.min, zero)" actually ensures that vr1.min is zero.
(Indeed, the following int_const_binop would attemp to divide by zero
On 11/19/2015 02:58 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 11:16 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> You are right, however as the original coding style was really broken,
>> it was much easier
>> to use the tool and clean-up fall-out.
>>
>> Waiting for thoughts related to v2.
>
> Better, but still some
On 19/11/15 14:41, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 01:38:53PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
That is troublesome. Could you look deeper?
Yes.
Thanks.
So the bad case is when we're in subst and returning a CLOBBER of zero
and 'from' is (reg/v:SI 80 [ x ]) and 'to' is (zero_e
On November 19, 2015 3:57:03 PM GMT+01:00, Marek Polacek
wrote:
>This fixes a failure to optimize division by an unsigned. The comment
>before
>the condition I'm fixing says "When vr0.max < 0, vr1.min != 0 and ..."
>but
>"&& !compare_values (vr1.min, zero)" actually ensures that vr1.min is
>zero
Thanks for the update. I'll fix that asap.
-Aditya
> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 08:36:58 -0500
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [graphite] Move codegen related functions to
> graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c
> From: dje@gmail.com
> To: hiradi...@msn.com; aditya..
On 2015.11.19 at 15:38 +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>
> In last two weeks I've removed couple of memory leaks, mainly tight to
> middle-end. Currently, a user of the GCC compiler can pass
> '--enable-checking=valgrind' configure option that will run all
> commands within valgrind environment, but a
On 19.11.2015 09:07, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 12.10.2015 12:58, Richard Biener wrote:
This backports the patch to allow bootstrapping with ISL 0.15 to the
GCC 5 branch (the GCC 4.9 branch will require backporting of some
dependencies).
I don't thin
Committed to trunk (as r230609) as obvious, having
verified that the docs build.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* doc/gty.texi (Support for inheritance): Fix missing
parentheses in example.
---
gcc/doc/gty.texi | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/gty.te
Hi Richard,
I send you updated version of patch which contains fixes you mentioned
and additional early exit in
register_edge_assert_for() for gcond with vector comparison - it tries
to produce assert for
if (vect != {0,0,0,0}) but can't create such constant. This is not
essential since this is
On 19/11/15 15:00, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
On 19/11/15 14:41, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 01:38:53PM +, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
That is troublesome. Could you look deeper?
Yes.
Thanks.
So the bad case is when we're in subst and returning a CLOBBER of zero
and 'from'
OK.
Jason
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 06:40:43PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> Here is WIP patch, not for check-in. There are still many FIXMEs, which I am
> going to resolve, however target-link-1.c testcase pass.
> Is this approach correct? Any comments on FIXMEs?
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/c/c-parser.c b/gcc/c/
Hi Bernd,
I had a look around. There's code testing HARD_REGNO_NREGS in
ree.c:combine_set_extension. It's inside #if 0, and labelled
"temporarily disabled". See if enabling that helps you? (Jeff, that #if
0 was added by you).
I suspect that the code was disabled because it prevented too many
On 11/17/2015 12:26 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> fprintf to stderr is never appropriate. All diagnostics should go through
> a diagnostic function that properly causes the message to be translated.
>
> If you want a fatal error (exit immediately after giving the message
> rather than continuing co
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 09:35 -0600, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> The EH scheme that we had been using for TM / libitm doesn't work
> properly. We fail to handle throwing exceptions whose constructors may
> throw themselves. We also do not clean up properly in all situations
> when a transactions abort
On 11/19/2015 04:35 PM, Dhole wrote:
> On 11/17/2015 12:26 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> fprintf to stderr is never appropriate. All diagnostics should go through
>> a diagnostic function that properly causes the message to be translated.
>>
>> If you want a fatal error (exit immediately after givin
On 11/19/2015 03:28 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
This is a refactoring patch discussed in another thread [1]. It gets
rid of CODE_FOR_nothing usage in optabs-tree.c by introducing boolean
predicated in optabs-query. Bootstrapped and regtesed on
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
Looks pretty reasonable, b
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 14:33:06 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 08:33:28PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> > diff --git a/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> > b/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> > index 772e198..6ee585e 100644
> > --- a/liboffloa
On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
> Given that gnu-indent seems to muck up C++ badly in my
> experience, clang-format may be a better long term solution. I'd really like
> to get to a point one day where formatting is a commit hook so that things are
> always kept properly formatted.
I hope yo
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 02:26:50PM +, Julian Brown wrote:
> OK, thanks -- as to what the standard says, it's so ill-specified in
> this area that nothing can be learned about the behaviour of offloaded
> regions within host_data constructs, and my question about that on the
> technical mailing
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 06:47:28PM +0300, Ilya Verbin wrote:
> I will add this:
>
> diff --git a/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> b/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> index 6ee585e..f8c1725 100644
> --- a/liboffloadmic/plugin/libgomp-plugin-intelmic.cpp
> +++ b/l
On 19 Nov 16:46, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 11/19/2015 03:28 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> >This is a refactoring patch discussed in another thread [1]. It gets
> >rid of CODE_FOR_nothing usage in optabs-tree.c by introducing boolean
> >predicated in optabs-query. Bootstrapped and regtesed on
> >x86_
Hi,
in an enabled-checking compiler gcc_checking_assert is always executed.
If that depends on things having happened under flag_checking being true,
but it's actually false during runtime due to -fno-checking things go
awry, like segfaulting in this case. The fix is obvious and checked in
a
Hi Michael,
On 19/11/15 16:13, Michael Matz wrote:
Hi,
in an enabled-checking compiler gcc_checking_assert is always executed.
If that depends on things having happened under flag_checking being true,
but it's actually false during runtime due to -fno-checking things go
awry, like segfaulting i
Jakub,
Here's the updated version of the Fortran changes. More test
cases have been added as well as the issues that Cesar
pointed on in error checking have been addressed (Thanks).
I've also addressed the issue, described below, in dealing
with declare directives when found within a BLOCK constr
This patch extends the existing support for acc routines in fortran.
It's a little bit more invasive than what I remembered, but it's still
fairly straightforward. Basically, it adds support for the following:
- name routines
- gang, worker, vector and seq clauses
In addition, I've also taught
Hi,
Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
The first problem is that we may copy pointers as integer data
and thus loose bounds. The second problem is that if we inline
memcpy, we also have to inline bounds
While porting the fortran acc routine changes from gomp4 to trunk, I
noticed that device was listed in the acc routine clause mask. That is
incorrect; it should be device_type not device. I fixed that problem in
the trunk patch submission. Here's the corresponding fix and test case
that I applied t
Jeff pre-approved the plugin version of this (as a new
file unittests/test-bitmap.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03284.html
with:
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up moving it
> elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is pre-approved.
This
This is effectively v4 of the unittests proposal; for the earlier
versions see:
* v1: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg00765.html
* v2: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01224.html
* v3: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg02947.html
This patch adds a selftest
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-gimple.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03304.html
> Comment indicates addition. But code actually generates a
> MULT_EXPR. Please fix.
Fixed
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end
> up moving it e
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-hash-map.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03301.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version moves the
Upon porting from gtest.h to selftest.h I ran into this warning which
is fatal during bootstrap:
In file included from ../../../src/gcc/toplev.c:89:0:
../../../src/gcc/function-tests.c: In member function ‘virtual void
{anonymous}::function_test_fndecl_int_void::run()’:
../../../src/gcc/selftest.
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-tree.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03303.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version puts the tests
Jeff approved an earlier version of this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03295.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files
> is pre-approved.
gcc/ChangeLog:
* et-forest.c: Include "selfte
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-hash-set.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03300.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version moves the
Jeff approved an older version of this (as a separate
unittests/test-folding.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03305.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files
> is pre-approved.
gcc/ChangeLog:
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-ggc.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03306.html
> Not terribly happy with that counter to used to create a big list
> to detect recursion. But I'm not offhand sure how to avoid without
> exposing more of the ggc system t
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-functions.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03310.html
with:
> There's some if (0) code in here that needs to be eliminated.
(done)
> The RTL case in particular is probably stretching the limits of what
> we can do wit
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-vec.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03308.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
This version puts the tests
Jeff approved an older version of this:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03285.html
with:
> Unless there's a good reason, drop the presumably redundant tests
> and this is OK. Save preapprovald for these changes as the bitmap
> patch.
This version removes the redundant tests, and mo
On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 19:17 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> So Jeff and I just had a chat, and we came up with some thoughts about
> how to proceed. I think we both agree that it would be good to have a
> special testing backend, along with frontends designed to be able to
> read in gimple or rtl
On 11/19/2015 04:34 PM, Nick Clifton wrote:
Hi Bernd,
I had a look around. There's code testing HARD_REGNO_NREGS in
ree.c:combine_set_extension. It's inside #if 0, and labelled
"temporarily disabled". See if enabling that helps you? (Jeff, that #if
0 was added by you).
I suspect that the code
Jeff conditionally approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-locations.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03307.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
> pre-approved.
>
> Cons
On 11/19/2015 05:13 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
in an enabled-checking compiler gcc_checking_assert is always executed.
If that depends on things having happened under flag_checking being true,
but it's actually false during runtime due to -fno-checking things go
awry, like segfaulting in this case.
Jeff approved an earlier version of this (as
unittests/test-rtl.c):
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-10/msg03302.html
> OK if/when prereqs are approved. Minor twiddling if we end up
> moving it elsewhere or standardizing/reducing header files is
>pre-approved.
This version puts the tests i
On 11/19/2015 09:53 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 11/19/2015 04:34 PM, Nick Clifton wrote:
Hi Bernd,
I had a look around. There's code testing HARD_REGNO_NREGS in
ree.c:combine_set_extension. It's inside #if 0, and labelled
"temporarily disabled". See if enabling that helps you? (Jeff, that #if
On 11/18/2015 09:33 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
The rs6000 target was hitting a bootstrap failure due to
-Werror=type-limits. Since warn_tautological_cmp and other warnings avoid
warning if one of the operands comes from a macro, I thought i
On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
The first problem is that we may copy pointers as integer data
and thus loose bounds. The second problem is that if we inl
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 09:35 -0600, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> Tested using the libitm testsuite on x86_64-linux.
Tested on powerpc64le-linux with no regressions and I confirmed
the new eh-5.C test case passes.
Peter
On 11/19/2015 06:06 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Frankly, the overall structure of ree is a mess -- I've found it
incredibly difficult to follow every time I've had to look at it.
Yeah, no kidding. The check seems to be in the wrong place - it's done
very late when we're replacing things, and IMO we s
On November 19, 2015 6:12:30 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
wrote:
>On 11/19/2015 05:31 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
>> Currently we fold all memcpy/memmove calls with a known data size.
>> It causes two problems when used with Pointer Bounds Checker.
>> The first problem is that we may copy pointers as
On 11/18/2015 11:20 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 09:36:21AM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
Otherwise ok.
See modified patch below. If you think vrp98.c is unnecessary, feel free
to dump it :).
If ok, could you commit it for me please? I don't have commit access.
R
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 11:18 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 09:35 -0600, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > Tested using the libitm testsuite on x86_64-linux.
>
> Tested on powerpc64le-linux with no regressions and I confirmed
> the new eh-5.C test case passes.
Thanks. Then I'll commi
On 11/19/2015 06:58 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 11/19/2015 11:16 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
You are right, however as the original coding style was really broken,
it was much easier
to use the tool and clean-up fall-out.
Waiting for thoughts related to v2.
Better, but still some oddities. I hope
In general I'm much happier with this approach, and I think this series
is close to ready, but I want to bring up some questions that could use
wider discussion.
This patch adds a selftest.h/.c to gcc, with an API loosely
modelled on gtest (though without the use of CamelCase): it
supports eno
On 11/19/2015 10:33 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 11:18 -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 09:35 -0600, Torvald Riegel wrote:
Tested using the libitm testsuite on x86_64-linux.
Tested on powerpc64le-linux with no regressions and I confirmed
the new eh-5.C test
On 11/19/2015 12:54 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> ContinuationIndentWidth: 2
> -ForEachMacros:
> ['_FOR_EACH','_FOR_EACH_1','FOR_EACH_AGGR_INIT_EXPR_ARG','FOR_EACH_ALIAS','FOR_EACH_ALLOCNO','FOR_EACH_ALLOCNO_OBJECT','FOR_EACH_ARTIFICIAL_DEF','FOR_EACH_ARTIFICIAL_USE','FOR_EACH_BB_FN','FOR_EACH_BB_REV
On 19 November 2015 at 17:09, Jeff Law wrote:
> The even longer term direction for this code is to separate out the
> type-limits warning from the canonicalization and shortening. I've got a
> blob of code form Kai that goes in that direction, but it needs more
> engineering around it.
>
> Ideall
On 11/19/2015 10:48 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
On 19 November 2015 at 17:09, Jeff Law wrote:
The even longer term direction for this code is to separate out the
type-limits warning from the canonicalization and shortening. I've got a
blob of code form Kai that goes in that direction, but i
On 11/19/2015 10:18 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 11/19/2015 06:06 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
Frankly, the overall structure of ree is a mess -- I've found it
incredibly difficult to follow every time I've had to look at it.
Yeah, no kidding. The check seems to be in the wrong place - it's done
very l
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 18:35 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> In general I'm much happier with this approach, and I think this series
> is close to ready, but I want to bring up some questions that could use
> wider discussion.
> > This patch adds a selftest.h/.c to gcc, with an API loosely
> > mode
On Nov 19, 2015, at 10:08 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc_assert terminates the process and no further testing is done,
> whereas the approach the kit tries to run as much of the testsuite as
> possible, and then fail if any errors occurred.
Running as much as possible is desirable over stopping a
On 11/19/2015 09:35 AM, Ryan Burn wrote:
This fixes an issue where the return type of an auto-deduced function gets
classified as a parameter pack if it's called in a decltype expression
inside of a type expansion.
Thanks! Do you have a copyright assignment on file with the FSF? This
patch i
On 11/18/2015 06:22 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
The EH scheme that we had been using for TM / libitm doesn't work
properly. We fail to handle throwing exceptions whose constructors may
throw themselves. We also do not clean up properly in all situations
when a transactions abort while being in th
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
