On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 07:37:30PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> @@ -104,6 +104,10 @@
> AC_CHECK_LIB(rt, shm_open,
>[link_sanitizer_common="-lrt $link_sanitizer_common"])
>
> +# Do a configure time check for -ldl
> +AC_CHECK_LIB(dl, dlsym,
> + [link_sanitizer_common="-lrt $link_sanitizer_co
On 01/08/2016 03:13 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following testcase ICEs, because move_plus_up attempts to
optimize (subreg:HI (plus:SI (...) (const_int 0xff78)) 0)
into (plus:HI (subreg:HI (...) 0) (const_int 0xff78)) which is
incorrect, HImode CONST_INT with MSB set should be (const_int -1
On January 11, 2016 7:21:59 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
wrote:
>On 01/05/2016 07:43 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> IIRC the logic at some point at least used host CPU detection to
>> select asm. That's undesirable if you want to run binaries on
>> different hosts. Not sure if this is still the ca
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 05:10:29PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-01-10 at 19:28 +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > > @@ -4167,6 +4167,7 @@
> > > -d "/opt/$with_advance_toolchain/bin/." -a \
> > > -d "/opt/$with_advance_toolchain/incl
On 11.01.16 19:57, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 07:37:30PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
@@ -104,6 +104,10 @@
AC_CHECK_LIB(rt, shm_open,
[link_sanitizer_common="-lrt $link_sanitizer_common"])
+# Do a configure time check for -ldl
+AC_CHECK_LIB(dl, dlsym,
+ [link_sanitizer_
On 01/09/16 02:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd like to ping the PR c++/66808, PR c++/69000
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02019.html
patch, fixing ICE with GNU __thread vars in templates.
Can't you unconditionally clear DECL_TEMPLATE_INFO regardless of local_p?
if (DECL_LANG_SP
Hi,
On 11.01.2016 20:03, Richard Biener wrote:
> On January 11, 2016 7:21:59 PM GMT+01:00, Bernd Schmidt
> wrote:
>> On 01/05/2016 07:43 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> IIRC the logic at some point at least used host CPU detection to
>>> select asm. That's undesirable if you want to run binaries
The standard says that whether an implicitly defined constructor is
deleted depends on whether "any potentially constructed subobject has a
type with a destructor that is deleted or inaccessible from the
defaulted default constructor", but it does not say the same about
triviality, nor that it
Hi,
On 11.01.2016 20:20, Michael Meissner wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 05:10:29PM -0600, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> On Sun, 2016-01-10 at 19:28 +, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
@@ -4167,6 +4167,7 @@
-d "/opt/$with_advance_toolchain/bin/." -a \
On 01/11/2016 03:01 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 01/09/16 02:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd like to ping the PR c++/66808, PR c++/69000
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02019.html
patch, fixing ICE with GNU __thread vars in templates.
Can't you unconditionally clear DECL_TEMPLAT
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 04:44:46PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 01/11/2016 03:01 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >On 01/09/16 02:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >>Hi!
> >>
> >>I'd like to ping the PR c++/66808, PR c++/69000
> >>http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02019.html
> >>patch, fixing IC
On 01/11/2016 04:52 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 04:44:46PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/11/2016 03:01 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
On 01/09/16 02:41, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
I'd like to ping the PR c++/66808, PR c++/69000
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02
> I posted last version of patch where I took review comments into account
> month ago:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01328.html
I'm OK with this version.
On 01/11/2016 03:47 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:46:21AM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
The following two patches fix some test cases for S/390.
Patch 1:
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20040204-1.c does not fail on S/390 at the moment.
The series looks fine to me.
jeff
On 01/11/2016 05:53 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
I'd like to switch the logic around in aarch64.c such that
-mlow-precision-recip-sqrt causes us to always emit the low-precision
software expansion for reciprocal square root. I have two reasons to do
this; first is consistency across -mcpu targets,
From: Trevor Saunders
Hi,
this hardly counts as a bug fix, but going through open bugs I saw PR54809, and
realized we don't actually need this attribute any more, so we might as well
just remove it.
bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu, ok for now or gcc 7? I don't
mind waiting, but it
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 05:04:16PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >You mean:
> >
> >--- gcc/cp/pt.c.jj 2016-01-05 16:46:02.891896607 +0100
> >+++ gcc/cp/pt.c 2016-01-11 21:33:09.065184178 +0100
> >@@ -12207,6 +12207,8 @@ tsubst_decl (tree t, tree args, tsubst_f
> > DECL_TEMPLATE_INSTA
On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Here is the updated patch. Joseph, is this OK?
I have no objections to this patch.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Mon, 11 Jan 2016, Michael Meissner wrote:
> I fixed the #ifdef to use __NO_FPRS__ (thanks for the heads up on that). I
> also believe I fixed the various formatting issues. These two patches build
> on
> a big endian power7 host and little endian power8 host with no regressions in
> the test
Ping:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02074.html
On 01/04/2016 09:49 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Ping: looking for review/approval of the patch below:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg02074.html
Thanks
Martin
On 12/22/2015 07:32 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
The attach
On 2015-12-18, at 9:05 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
> On 2015-12-09, at 8:00 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
>
>> The attached fixes an ICE building gridengine. The problem is we are asked
>> to do an HImode reload
>> for a floating pointing register. However, we can only do 32 and 64-bit
>> loa
The HP libm doesn't support the ERANGE error for exp2(). So, we need to skip
this test as on sun unix.
Tested on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 and hppa64-hp-hpux11.11.
Committed to trunk.
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
2016-01-11 John David Anglin
PR tree-optimizati
On 01/11/2016 03:32 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Yeah, reassoc is largely about canonicalization.
Plus doing it in TER is almost certainly more complex than getting it right
in reassoc to begin with.
I guess canonicalizing differently is ok but you'll still create
((a & b) & 1) & c then if you
On 12/22/2015 09:32 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
+ if (is_attribute_p ("aligned", name)
+ || is_attribute_p ("vector_size", name))
+{
+ /* Attribute argument may be a dependent indentifier. */
+ if (tree t = args ? TREE_VALUE (args) : NULL_TREE)
+ if (value_dependent_express
OK.
Jason
Hi James,
> -Original Message-
> From: James Greenhalgh [mailto:james.greenha...@arm.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 5:24 PM
> To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: n...@arm.com; marcus.shawcr...@arm.com;
> richard.earns...@arm.com; Kumar, Venkataramanan;
> philipp.toms...@theobroma-syst
When promote_function_mode and promote_ssa_mode changes the sign
differently, following is the cause for the problem in PR67714.
_8 = fn1D.5055 ();
f_13 = _8;
function returns -15 and in _8 it is sign extended. In the second
statement, we say that the value is SUBREG_PROMOTED and promote
Hi Nick,
Thanks for your detailed review.
Please find an updated version of this patch here. I have tried to modify
it as per your suggestions.
> I would suggest:
> static bool
Done.
> + if (recog_memoized (insn) == CODE_FOR_udivmodsi4_g13
> have an attribute on these insns, and then test f
On Monday, January 11, 2016 04:57:18 PM Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 01/08/2016 10:33 AM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> > 2016-01-08 Thomas Preud'homme
> >
> > * g++.dg/pr67989.C: Remove ARM-specific option.
> > * gcc.target/arm/pr67989.C: New file.
>
> I checked some other arm te
101 - 129 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
