[Patch]Bug 89057 - [8/9/10 Regression] AArch64 ld3 st4 less optimized

Hi All, The attached patch (89057.patch) fixes the subjected issue. Please let me know your thoughts on the patch. Thanks, Jaydeep. 89057.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost overflow by introducing scaling bound

On 4/27/19 6:12 AM, bin.cheng wrote: > HI Martin, I remember you introduced comp_cost/cost_scaling to improve one > case > in spec2017. Unfortunately I don't have access to the benchmark now, could > you help > verify that if this patch has performance issue on it please? Thanks Yes, it's 548.

Backport fix for PR89037

It's not obvious from the PR whether this is a regression, so I'm not sure whether it deserves to be backported or not. Just in case... Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, aarch64_be-elf and x86_64-linux-gnu. OK for gcc-8-branch and gcc-7-branch? If not, should I close the PR? Thanks, Richard The t

[committed] Two trivial backports to gcc-8-branch

Patches to fix two typos introduced between GCC 7 and GCC 8. Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, aarch64_be-elf and x86_64-linux-gnu. Committed as obvious for the first and preapproved (but also obvious) for the second. Richard Fix POLY_INT_CST/CONST_POLY_INT typo (PR 89631) 2019-04-29 Richard Sandif

Re: [PATCH][DOC] Define email limit for gcc-patches mailing list.

On 4/26/19 10:31 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On 26 April 2019 16:08:19 CEST, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Martin Liška wrote: >>> The patch clarifies that gcc-patches mailing list allows up to 400kB >>> size of an email. >> >> Thanks, yes. > > Maybe drop references to g

Re: Backport fix for PR89037

On April 29, 2019 9:51:11 AM GMT+02:00, Richard Sandiford wrote: >It's not obvious from the PR whether this is a regression, so I'm not >sure whether it deserves to be backported or not. Just in case... > >Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu, aarch64_be-elf and x86_64-linux-gnu. >OK for gcc-8-branch and

RE: [Aarch64][SVE] Dot product support

Hi Richard, This is the updated patch with your comments. In addition to that, I removed vectype_in from the build_vect_cond_expr call, since it wasn't really necessary. Alejandro > -Original Message- > From: Richard Sandiford > Sent: 26 April 2019 14:29 > To: Alejandro Martinez Vicente

Re: [RFC] Come up with is_empty for hash_{table,map,set}.

On 4/26/19 10:37 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On 26 April 2019 14:07:20 CEST, Richard Biener > wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:26 AM Martin Liška wrote: >>> >>> Hi. >>> >>> We do have vec<...>::is_empty function, but not for >> hash_{table,map,set}. >>> Would you mind adding the fu

Re: [Aarch64][SVE] Dot product support

Alejandro Martinez Vicente writes: > @@ -5885,6 +5885,56 @@ is_nonwrapping_integer_induction (stmt_vec_info > stmt_vinfo, struct loop *loop) > <= TYPE_PRECISION (lhs_type)); > } > > +/* Check if masking can be supported by inserting a condional expression. conditional > + CODE is t

Re: [RFC] D support for S/390

> Robin, have you been testing with --disable-multilib or something > similar? yes, I believe so... stupid mistake :( Thanks for fixing it so quickly.

Re: [Patch]Bug 89057 - [8/9/10 Regression] AArch64 ld3 st4 less optimized

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 8:44 AM Jaydeep Chauhan wrote: > > Hi All, > > The attached patch (89057.patch) fixes the subjected issue. > Please let me know your thoughts on the patch. Thanks for your patch. Before getting started with reviewing the patch , the first question is whether you have a co

Re: [RFC] D support for S/390

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 06:11, Matthias Klose wrote: > > On 27.04.19 14:08, Iain Buclaw wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 at 12:24, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:26:15AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > >>> On 15.03.19 16:49, Robin Dapp wrote: > during the last few days

[PATCH] Bump libgnat to 10.

r270581 (git 70f448fa) changed BASE-VER to 10.0.0. But, gnat still uses so version 9. GCC assignment papers on file. I don't have write access. 2019-04-29 Michael K. Darling * gnatvsn.ads: Bump Library_Version to 10. Index: gcc/ada/gnatvsn.ads =

[GCC 9 RM attention] Re: [OpenACC] Update OpenACC data clause semantics to the 2.5 behavior

Hi Jakub! I know it's very late in the GCC 9 release process, but I'm still catching up with OpenACC patch review, and just at the end of last week I'd noticed that this commit (trunk r261813): On Fri, 25 May 2018 13:01:58 -0700, Cesar Philippidis wrote: > This patch updates GCC's to support Op

Re: [PATCH][stage1] Prefer to use strlen call instead of inline expansion (PR target/88809).

On 4/26/19 11:05 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > Then I'm very open to adjust that even for -Os to 'call strlen'. That said, I'm suggesting following updated patch. Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. Thanks, Martin >From 435de2e8b88b2d9898901f2343e03102da367982 Mon

Re: [Patch]Bug 89057 - [8/9/10 Regression] AArch64 ld3 st4 less optimized

>>Before getting started with reviewing the patch , the first question is whether you have a copyright assignment on file or does your employer have one on record with the FSF ? Ramana, We asked for copyright assignment form ,with details asked by copyright-cl...@fsf.org(craig) @ ass...@gnu.org.

Re: [GCC 9 RM attention] Re: [OpenACC] Update OpenACC data clause semantics to the 2.5 behavior

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:18:15PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > I know it's very late in the GCC 9 release process, but I'm still > catching up with OpenACC patch review, and just at the end of last week > I'd noticed that this commit (trunk r261813): I'd like to see full patch before consideri

[PATCH 0/3] Small clean up of profile_{count,probability}

The patch makes couple of adjustements: 1) I changed enum values to use capital letters. It's aligned with our coding style and it makes the code more readable. E.g. profile_quality::profile_guessed_local vs. static profile_probability guessed_always () 2) I removed usage of fully qualifi

[PATCH 3/3] Add vertical spacing in order to separate functions.

gcc/ChangeLog: 2019-04-29 Martin Liska * profile-count.c: Add vertical spacing in order to separate functions. * profile-count.h: Likewise. --- gcc/profile-count.c | 25 +++--- gcc/profile-count.h | 51 +++-- 2 f

[PATCH 2/3] Do not use full qualified names if possible.

gcc/ChangeLog: 2019-04-29 Martin Liska * profile-count.h: Do not use full qualified names if possible. * profile-count.c (profile_count::to_frequency): Likewise. --- gcc/profile-count.c | 15 ++--- gcc/profile-count.h | 155 ++-

[PATCH 1/3] Use cappital letters for enum value names.

gcc/ChangeLog: 2019-04-29 Martin Liska * profile-count.h (enum profile_quality): Use cappital letters for enum value names. Use the adjusted names. * profile-count.c: Use the adjusted names. --- gcc/profile-count.c | 38 +++ gcc/profile-count.h | 114 +++

[PATCH] Wrap a string with _ for translation (PR translation/90274).

Hi. Simple patch to address a missing translation of a string. Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. Ready to be installed? Thanks, Martin gcc/ChangeLog: 2019-04-29 Martin Liska PR translation/90274 * opts.c (print_filtered_help): Wrap strin

Re: Adding noexcept-specification on tuple constructors (LWG 2899)

noted, thanks :) Best, Nina On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 22:46, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 28/04/19 22:44 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >On 29/04/19 00:18 +0300, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > >>On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 14:53, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >>> > >>>On 24/04/19 11:21 +0100, Nina Dinka Ranns

[PATCH] Do not emit # DEBUG a => {CLOBBER}

This turns {CLOBBER}s into resets, eliding an otherwise necessary debug temp and the constructor copying. Bootstrapped on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, testing in progress. Richard. 2019-04-29 Richard Biener * tree-ssa.c (insert_debug_temp_for_var_def): For {CLOBBER} rhs issue

Re: [RFC] Come up with is_empty for hash_{table,map,set}.

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:40 AM Martin Liška wrote: > > On 4/26/19 10:37 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > > On 26 April 2019 14:07:20 CEST, Richard Biener > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:26 AM Martin Liška wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi. > >>> > >>> We do have vec<...>::is_empty functio

Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost overflow by introducing scaling bound

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 6:13 AM bin.cheng wrote: > > Hi, > > This is the draft patch avoiding scaling cost overflow by introducing a > scaling bound > in IVOPTs. For now the bound is 20, and scaling factor will be further > scaled wrto > this bound. For example, scaling factor like 1, 1000, 20

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/87982 Fix generate_n and fill_n use of _Size parameter

The standard only requires that _Size can be converted to an integral type, not that it can be used for arithmetic. Add a new set of __size_to_integer helper functions to do the conversion (which will be ambiguous if there is no one conversion that is better than any others). Also add tests for D

[PATCH] Remove unused std::_Iter_base class template

This class template has been unused since __gnu_debug::__base was removed in r263786. * include/bits/stl_iterator_base_types.h (_Iter_base): Remove unused class template and partial specialization. Tested x86_64-linux (normal and debug mode), committed to trunk. commit f87489c24

[PATCH] Add nodiscard to std::vector::empty()

We already added it to the std::vector primary template. * include/bits/stl_bvector.h (vector::empty()): Add nodiscard attribute. Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk. commit 42dd15d09edbdafbeb068b9b2191e459b9df1b82 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date: Mon Apr 29 13:23:54 20

Re: [PATCH][stage1] Support profile (BB counts and edge probabilities) in GIMPLE FE.

On 4/26/19 3:18 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:12 AM Martin Liška wrote: >> >> On 4/9/19 3:19 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: Hi. There's updated version that supports profile quality for both counts and probabilities. I'm wondering whether ENTRY and EXIT BBs nee

RE: [Aarch64][SVE] Dot product support

> -Original Message- > From: Richard Sandiford > Sent: 29 April 2019 09:42 > To: Alejandro Martinez Vicente > Cc: GCC Patches ; nd ; Richard > Biener > Subject: Re: [Aarch64][SVE] Dot product support > > Alejandro Martinez Vicente writes: > > @@ -5885,6 +5885,56 @@ is_nonwrapping_inte

[PATCH] Fix PR 90273

The following fixes PR90273 where the testcase exhibits an excessive number of debug stmts after the recent fixes to CFG cleanup to not throw away debug stmts it cannot move but instead move and reset them. This excessiveness causes compile-time and memory-usage to go through the roof. The fix i

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Use cappital letters for enum value names.

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:54:31AM +0200, marxin wrote: > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2019-04-29 Martin Liska > > * profile-count.h (enum profile_quality): Use cappital letters s/pp/p/ Jakub

[PATCH] Use _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT_IF for std::swap

* include/bits/move.h (swap(T&, T&), swap(T (&)[N], T (&)[N])): Use _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT_IF to simplify declarations. This just avoids having to repeat the name and parameter-list of the functions. Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk. commit ce102c5eec35cd400a7be641f82ca1

Re: [PATCH] PR libstdc++/87982 Fix generate_n and fill_n use of _Size parameter

On 29/04/19 13:13 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: The standard only requires that _Size can be converted to an integral type, not that it can be used for arithmetic. Add a new set of __size_to_integer helper functions to do the conversion (which will be ambiguous if there is no one conv

Remove DDR_INNER_LOOP

...since it was only ever zero in practice. I wondered about making it a symbolic constant instead, but it didn't seem worth it when there was only one user (and that user was part of the internal tree-data-ref.c implementation). Tested on aarch64-linux-gnu. OK to install? Richard 2019-04-29

Re: Remove DDR_INNER_LOOP

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 3:38 PM Richard Sandiford wrote: > > ...since it was only ever zero in practice. I wondered about making > it a symbolic constant instead, but it didn't seem worth it when > there was only one user (and that user was part of the internal > tree-data-ref.c implementation).

[PATCH] Fix PR90278

I am testing the following patch for PR90278. Bootstrap / regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Richard. 2019-04-29 Richard Biener PR tree-optimization/90278 * tree-ssa-forwprop.c (pass_forwprop::execute): Transfer/clean EH on comparison simplification.

Re: [Patch]Bug 89057 - [8/9/10 Regression] AArch64 ld3 st4 less optimized

Hello Ramana, Description for bug-89057: -- This issue is occurs specifically with vcombine* method with optimization. Assembly generated by vcombine* is less optimize. But individual vcombine* method can combining instruction properly and giving optimized output as

[PATCH] PR libstdc++/71312 Increase alignment of pooled mutexes

PR libstdc++/71312 * src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc (get_mutex): Align pool mutexes to 64 bytes. Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk. commit 7bdfcdf0100b2e340339388e5cef610c9f6a251f Author: Jonathan Wakely Date: Mon Mar 11 21:18:05 2019 + PR libstdc++/71312 Increase

[wwwdocs] C++ Coroutines

I've committed this as obvious. The TS section didn't note coroutines were in progress. nathan -- Nathan Sidwell Index: projects/cxx-status.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/projects/cxx-status.html,v retrieving revision 1

[committed] Consider USE of return value a flow active insn even after reload (PR rtl-optimization/90257, PR target/90178)

Hi! As discussed in the two PRs, it is a bad idea to rely on the reload pass keeping the IL insufficiently optimized (with noop moves), it regresses important benchmarks on PowerPC. The actual reason why on the PR90178 testcase we generated better code is that we had an almost empty block (contain

Re: [RFH] split {generic,gimple}-match.c files

On 9/4/18 5:07 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 09/03/2018 04:43 PM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Martin Liška wrote: >> >>> On 09/03/2018 04:00 PM, Richard Biener wrote: On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Martin Liška wrote: > On 09/03/2018 02:54 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 09/03/

Re: [RFH] split {generic,gimple}-match.c files

On 9/10/18 1:43 PM, Martin Liška wrote: > On 09/04/2018 05:07 PM, Martin Liška wrote: >> - in order to achieve real speed up we need to split also other generated >> (and also dwarf2out.c, i386.c, ..) files: >> here I'm most concerned about insn-recog.c, which can't be split the same >> way witho

[C++ PATCH] some cleanups

This patch fixes some formatting and code clarity issues I've tripped over in the past few months. duplicate_decls has some function- and var- specific behaviour that was confusingly commented, and, for the var case mixed the checking for var with checking for the flag to copy. process_outer

Re: [PATCH][DOC] Define email limit for gcc-patches mailing list.

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, Martin Liška wrote: The patch clarifies that gcc-patches mailing list allows up to 400kB size of an email. >> Maybe drop references to gcc-prs while at it as: >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2017-05/msg6.html > Good idea. I'm going to move multiple legacy mailing li

Re: [4/4][PATCH] Discussing PR83507

Hi, Segher > > > > In pr84524.c we got a loop with an extended inline asm: > > > > asm volatile ("" : "+r" (v)) > > > > which also gives us a “surprising” situation Alexander predicts. > > > > > > > > For sched-deps scanner such volatile asm is a “true barrier” and we > > > > create dependencies t

[PATCH][GCC-8][AArch64] PR target/90075 Prefer bsl/bit/bif for copysignf. (backport GCC-8)

Hi All, This patch is to fix the ICE caused in expand pattern of copysignf builtin. This is a back port to r267019 of trunk. Bootstrapped on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and regression tested on aarch64-none-elf. Ok for gcc 8 branch? If ok, could someone commit the patch on my behalf, I don't have

[PATCH][GCC-7][AArch64] PR target/90075 Prefer bsl/bit/bif for copysignf. (backport GCC-7)

Hi All, This patch is to fix the ICE caused by expand pattern of copysignf builtin. This is a back port to r267019 of trunk. Bootstrapped on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and regression tested on aarch64-none-elf. Ok for gcc 7 branch? If ok, could someone please commit the patch on my behalf, I don'

Re: [4/4][PATCH] Discussing PR83507

Hi! On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 07:28:12PM +0300, Roman Zhuykov wrote: > > This code was added in 1997 (r14770). In 2004 the documentation was > > changed to clarify how things really work (r88999): > > > > "Note that even a volatile @code{asm} instruction can be moved relative to > > other code, inc

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR 90273

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > > The following fixes PR90273 where the testcase exhibits an excessive > number of debug stmts after the recent fixes to CFG cleanup to not > throw away debug stmts it cannot move but instead move and reset them. > This excessiveness causes compile-tim

Re: [PATCH][DOC] Define email limit for gcc-patches mailing list.

> On 26 Apr 2019, at 15:08, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Martin Liška wrote: >> The patch clarifies that gcc-patches mailing list allows up to 400kB >> size of an email. > As one minor detail, note we have KB in one place and with the > patch would have kB. Technically it's p

[C++ Patch] Avoid some duplicate error messages

Hi, I have a small back queue of tweaks of various kinds and sizes, this one seems small enough to be safe wrt last minute release branch fixes. While working on the regression c++/88969, some duplicate errors showed up when we started giving appropriate diagnostics instead of ICEing, which

Go patch committed: Avoid crash on real declaration of type with method

This patch to the Go frontend avoids a compiler crash on the real declaration of a previously-declared type with an existing method. This avoids a compiler crash on invalid code, and fixes GCC PR 90272. Bootstrapped and ran Go testsuite on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline. Ian Index: gc

Re: [PATCH] Wrap a string with _ for translation (PR translation/90274).

On 4/29/19 5:06 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > Hi. > > Simple patch to address a missing translation of a string. > > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > > Ready to be installed? > Thanks, > Martin > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > 2019-04-29 Martin Liska > > PR

Re: [PATCH] Bump libgnat to 10.

On 4/29/19 4:04 AM, Michael Darling wrote: > r270581 (git 70f448fa) changed BASE-VER to 10.0.0. But, gnat still > uses so version 9. > > GCC assignment papers on file. I don't have write access. > > > 2019-04-29 Michael K. Darling > > * gnatvsn.ads: Bump Library_Version to 10. THan

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Fix GNU coding style in lto-common.c.

On 3/14/19 7:02 AM, marxin wrote: > > gcc/lto/ChangeLog: > > 2019-03-14 Martin Liska > > * lto-common.c: Update coding style. > * lto.c (materialize_cgraph): Likewise. > --- > gcc/lto/lto-common.c | 214 ++- > gcc/lto/lto.c| 30 +++

Re: [PATCH] Fix a missed case in predicate analysis of the late uninit pass

On 4/8/19 3:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 2:26 PM Vladislav Ivanishin wrote: >> >> Richard Biener writes: >> >>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 4:05 PM Vladislav Ivanishin wrote: Richard Biener writes: > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 5:36 PM Vladislav Ivanishin wrot

Re: [PATCH] claim ifunc support on several NetBSD architectures

On 4/7/19 7:31 AM, co...@sdf.org wrote: > architecture list from netbsd src/tests/libexec/ld.elf_so/t_ifunc.c > (quick reference: > https://github.com/NetBSD/src/blob/trunk/tests/libexec/ld.elf_so/t_ifunc.c#L38 > ) > tested on netbsd/amd64. > > ifuncs worked anyway, but I can't use target_clones

Re: Please help me to review the patch about improve cse optimization for insn with inout ops

On 3/23/19 11:46 AM, 钟云德 wrote: > hi, all >I am a new guy work on this GCC Bugzilla, and need some help to review > patch detailed showed on > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83855, thanks! > I'd need to see the machine description you're working with. It may be better to avoid

Re: [PATCH][stage1] Refactor gimple_fold_builtin_memory_op function.

On 3/12/19 2:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > Hi. > > The patch is about simplification and usage of enum types. ENDP integer > does not make much sense in this usage. > > Patch can bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu and survives regression tests. > > Ready to be installed after stage1 opens? > Thanks, >

Re: [PATCH] Fix -Wenum-compare-switch warning in i386.c.

On 3/8/19 5:34 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > A small patch that deals with: > gcc/config/i386/i386.c:39427:11:Semantic Issue: comparison of two values with > different enumeration types in switch statement ('enum built_in_function' and > 'ix86_builtins'): -Wenum-compare-switch > > Is it fine to inst

Re: [PATCH] Simplify sinh (x) / cosh (x)

On 1/22/19 12:31 PM, Rafael Tsuha wrote: > This patch simplifies the expression sinh (x) / cosh (x) to tanh (x). > This rule is mathematically valid. > > There's a slight difference in the result when applying this > optimization with x in the interval 0 < x <= 1e-4951. With the > optimization, th

Re: [PATCH][DOC] Define email limit for gcc-patches mailing list.

On 4/29/19, Martin Liška wrote: > On 4/26/19 10:31 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >> On 26 April 2019 16:08:19 CEST, Gerald Pfeifer >> wrote: >>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Martin Liška wrote: The patch clarifies that gcc-patches mailing list allows up to 400kB size of an email. >>> >>>

Re: [PATCH] Add simplification rule tanh (x) * cosh (x) -> sinh (x)

On 1/30/19 7:10 AM, Bárbara de Castro Fernandes wrote: > This patch simplifies the function tanh (x) * cosh (x) -> sinh (x). > This rule is derived from the relationship between hyperbolic > functions. > > I ran the tests and gfortran.dg/pr79966.f90 failed, but this failure > is unrelated to the p

Re: [PATCH][DOC] Define email limit for gcc-patches mailing list.

On 4/29/19, Eric Gallager wrote: > On 4/29/19, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 4/26/19 10:31 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >>> On 26 April 2019 16:08:19 CEST, Gerald Pfeifer >>> wrote: On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Martin Liška wrote: > The patch clarifies that gcc-patches mailing list allows up

Re: [PATCH] Update sinhatanh test

Hi. Ping :-) (I hope I am not bothering you with it) Giuliano. On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 6:51 PM Giuliano Belinassi wrote: > > Previously, the tests 'sinhatanh-2.c' and 'sinhatanh-3.c' did not count > the number of functions found in the tree-dump. This patch address this > issue. > > 2019-01-10 G

Re: [PATCH] RX: Add rx-*-linux target

On 3/26/19 8:21 AM, Yoshinori Sato wrote: > I ported linux kernel to Renesas RX. > > rx-*-elf target output a binary different from the standard ELF. > It has the same format as the Renesas compiler. > > But the linux kernel requires the standard ELF format. > I want to define a rx-*-linux target

Re: [PATCH GCC10] ipa-inline.c: Trivial fix on function not declared inline check in want_inline_small_function_p

On 3/1/19 1:39 AM, JunMa wrote: > Hi >Since MAX_INLINE_INSNS_AUTO should be below or equal to >MAX_INLINE_INSNS_SINGLE (see params.def), there is no need >to do second inlining limit check on growth when function not >declared inline, this patch removes it. >Bootstrapped and t

Re: [wwwdocs] C++ Coroutines

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > I've committed this as obvious. The TS section didn't note coroutines > were in progress. Thanks, Nathan. You also could have committed it wearing your C++ maintainer hat. ;-) As a small note, our web pages are mirrored on www.gnu.org and that site

Re: [PATCH 01/10] libiberty: Fix an out of bounds read in d_expression_1()

On 1/10/19 5:13 PM, Ben L wrote: > Hi all, > > First time emailing gcc-patches, so I'm sorry if I get any of this wrong or if > there's obvious errors repeated in my patches. AFAICT I should be sending each > change individually rather than as one bulk patch, so I'm sorry about the spam > too. >

Re: [PATCH][stage1] Support profile (BB counts and edge probabilities) in GIMPLE FE.

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > Can you move the GIMPLE/RTL FE specific data in c_declspecs to > a substructure accessed via indirection? I guess enlarging that > isn't really what we should do. You'd move gimple_or_rtl_pass > there and make that pointer one to a struct aux_fe_data

Re: [PATCH PR90240][RFC]Avoid scaling cost overflow by introducing scaling bound

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 8:01 PM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 6:13 AM bin.cheng wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > This is the draft patch avoiding scaling cost overflow by introducing a > > scaling bound > > in IVOPTs. For now the bound is 20, and scaling factor will be further >

Re: [PATCH GCC10] ipa-inline.c: Trivial fix on function not declared inline check in want_inline_small_function_p

在 2019/4/30 上午5:57, Jeff Law 写道: On 3/1/19 1:39 AM, JunMa wrote: Hi Since MAX_INLINE_INSNS_AUTO should be below or equal to MAX_INLINE_INSNS_SINGLE (see params.def), there is no need to do second inlining limit check on growth when function not declared inline, this patch removes

Re: [PATCH] Fix PR 90273

On Apr 29, 2019, Richard Biener wrote: > OK for trunk and branch? > 2019-04-29 Richard Biener > PR tree-optimization/90273 > * tree-ssa-dce.c (eliminate_unnecessary_stmts): Eliminate > useless debug stmts. LGTM, thanks -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter https://FSFLA.

Re: [PATCH] Add simplification rule tanh (x) * cosh (x) -> sinh (x)

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 02:56, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 1/30/19 7:10 AM, Bárbara de Castro Fernandes wrote: > > This patch simplifies the function tanh (x) * cosh (x) -> sinh (x). > > This rule is derived from the relationship between hyperbolic > > functions. > > > > I ran the tests and gfortran.dg/