Re: [PATCH 3/6] Implement interleave via permutation.

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Richard Henderson wrote: > From: Richard Henderson > + /* Certain vector operations can be implemented with vector permutation. > */ > + if (VECTOR_MODE_P (mode)) > +{ > + enum tree_code tcode = ERROR_MARK; > + rtx sel; > + > + if (binoptab == vec_inte

Re: [PATCH 3/6] Implement interleave via permutation.

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011, Richard Henderson wrote: > VEC_UNPACK_HI_EXPR and VEC_UNPACK_LO_EXPR need even more -- at > least for signed -- a source of sign-extended data. Either a LT > comparison that produces -1 (common, but not universal) or an > ASHIFTRT with a constant. We're definitely in the land

Build broken due to "[PATCH] Add gcc-ar/nm/ranlib wrappers for slim LTO v2"

> From: Andi Kleen > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:55:48 +0200 > 2011-10-19 Andi Kleen > > * Makefile.in (MOSTLYCLEANFILES): Add gcc-ar/nm/ranlib. > (native): Add gcc-ar, gcc-nm, gcc-ranlib. > (AR_LIBS, gcc-ar, gcc-ar.o, gcc-ranlib, gcc-ranlib.o, > gcc-nm, gcc-nm.o, gcc

Re: Build broken due to "[PATCH] Add gcc-ar/nm/ranlib wrappers for slim LTO v2"

> From: Andi Kleen > Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 10:09:48 +0200 > Oops. Can you please confirm this patch fixes it? My autotester is still busy after your commit, but has passed the point of failure. Thanks for fixing. brgds, H-P

Re: New port: Renesas RL78

On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, DJ Delorie wrote: > The Renesas RL78 is a new low-power 8/16 bit microcontroller, with an > architecture much like the original Z80. Just some random spottings. > Index: configure.ac > +# Dereferencing -1 is a compile-time error This (those lines) look a little cryptic (a

Re: New port: Renesas RL78

On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > Index: configure.ac > > > +# Dereferencing -1 is a compile-time error > > > > This (those lines) look a little cryptic (and lack punctuation ;) > > Wild improvement guess: "Too small 'int'?". > > No, the compiler specifically tests for unaligned acces

Massive breakage with your libgcc patches

> From: Rainer Orth > Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:37:33 +0100 > Rainer Orth writes: > > > The next patch in the series moves crtstuff.c, extra_parts, EXTRA_PARTS, > > EXTRA_MULTILIB_PARTS and referenced files to libgcc. This will avoid > > errors due to inconsistencies in extra_parts between gcc

Re: [CRIS] Convert CRIS to constraints.md

> From: Anatoly Sokolov > Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:37:12 +0100 > As subject suggests. > > Regression tested on cris-axis-elf. > > Comments? Thanks, I'll review this once the tree returns to single-digit regression state. brgds, H-P

Re: expr.c: don't assume MUL for scaling pointers

On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, DJ Delorie wrote: > > GCC assumes the target has a multiply insn, but better code is > generated using shifts if it doesn't (vs a libcall). Found with the > rl78-elf port. > > * expr.c (expand_expr_real_2): Don't try to emit a MUL-based > expression if the target do

Re: Massive breakage with your libgcc patches

> From: Rainer Orth > Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:10:50 +0100 > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > > For big changes such as this, please test on a cross > > configuration as well. > > A random cross wouldn't help, and I'd claim it's impractical to set

Re: Massive breakage with your libgcc patches

> From: Rainer Orth > Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:10:50 +0100 > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > For cris-elf, a patch in the range 180770:180778 supposedly > > yours, cause massive testsuite failures on the form of not > > finding functions in libgcc at link-time. It se

Committed: fix cris-elf fallout from libgcc move

Committed after testing cross to cris-elf and crisv32-elf; for the former back to the two regressions before the recent libgcc move. Ironically, the *reference* in the quoted failure: > complex-1.c:(.text+0x9e): undefined reference to `__nesf2' should not have been there in the first place, as the

ping*2: [RFA:] testsuite infrastructure for options implied by dg-final methods

Ping again, CC:ing testsuite maintainers. Honza thought this was a good idea, if that helps. > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:34:07 +0200 > Subject changed from '[RFA:] fix breakage with "Update testsuite > to run with slim LTO"' exce

Re: ping*2: [RFA:] testsuite infrastructure for options implied by dg-final methods

> From: Mike Stump > Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:53:05 +0100 > On Nov 4, 2011, at 6:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > > Ping again, CC:ing testsuite maintainers. > > With the number of qualified individuals commenting in the > thread, I was going to stay out of it.

Re: ping*2: [RFA:] testsuite infrastructure for options implied by dg-final methods

> From: Mike Stump > Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 18:54:22 +0100 > On Nov 4, 2011, at 10:41 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > I'll wait a few days. > > No need to wait. :-) If someone finds a way and is > motivated, they will fix this and the other instances. :-

Re: [CRIS] Convert CRIS to constraints.md

> From: Anatoly Sokolov > Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 20:37:12 +0100 > Comments? OK to install? > > * config/cris/constraints.md: New file. Whee! > * config/cris/cris.h (REG_CLASS_FROM_LETTER, CONSTRAINT_LEN, > CRIS_CONST_OK_FOR_LETTER_P, CONST_OK_FOR_CONSTRAINT_P, >

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 00:50:47 +0100 > These are the changes to libstdc++ to make use of the new atomics. I > changed the files to use the new atomics, and bkoz did a shuffling of > the include file layout to better suit the new c++ approach. > > previously, libstdc++ p

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 05:25:15 +0100 > On 11/06/2011 07:38 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > This (formally a change in the range 181027:181034) got me three > > libstdc++ regressions for cris-elf, which has no "atomic" > >

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:44:47 +0100 > Actually, this target has no lock free support whatsoever? ie, no > compare_and_swap instruction, nor an implementation of > sync_lock_test_and_set and sync_lock_release? In CRIS versions where such support would make sense: of c

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: "Joseph S. Myers" > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 17:24:04 +0100 > On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > > Actually, this target has no lock free support whatsoever? ie, no > > compare_and_swap instruction, nor an implementation of > > sync_lock_test_and_set > > and sync_lock_release?

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 19:08:26 +0100 > So, what DO we do if there is no basic level of atomic > support... I just realized I may be feeding you an inconsistent configuration, see the atomicity stuff in libstdc++-v3/config/cpu/cris. Is that just obsolete and unused now o

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 15:44:47 +0100 > >> On 11/06/2011 07:38 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >>> This (formally a change in the range 181027:181034) got me three > >>> libstdc++ regressions for cris-elf, > >> yes, I ha

Re: PowerPC shrink-wrap support 3 of 3

> From: Alan Modra > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100 > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > * function.c (bb_active_p): Delete. > (dup_block_and_redirect, active_insn_between): New functions. > (convert_jumps_to_returns, emit_return_for_exit)

Re: [CRIS] Hookize FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P

> From: Anatoly Sokolov > Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 22:42:53 +0100 > This patch removes obsolete FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P macro from CRIS back end > in the GCC and introduces equivalent TARGET_FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P target > hook. > > Regression tested on cris-axis-elf. > > OK to install? Pl

Revert "PowerPC shrink-wrap support 3 of 3"

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100 > > From: Alan Modra > > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100 > > > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > > > * function.c (bb_active_p): Delete.

Re: Revert "PowerPC shrink-wrap support 3 of 3"

> From: Richard Guenther > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:22:56 +0100 > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > >> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > >> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100 > > > >> > From: Alan Modra > >>

Re: Revert "PowerPC shrink-wrap support 3 of 3"

> From: Bernd Schmidt > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100 > HP, can you run full tests? Cross-test to cris-elf in progress. Thanks! brgds, H-P

Re: Revert "PowerPC shrink-wrap support 3 of 3"

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:12:54 +0100 > > From: Bernd Schmidt > > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100 > > > HP, can you run full tests? > > Cross-test to cris-elf in progress. > Thanks! Works, no regressions compared to b

Re: [PATCH] pr51038 atomic_flag on targets with no atomic support.

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:52:44 +0100 > On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > Justa minute > > > > Andrew > doh. sorry about that Test cross to cris-elf in progress for your second take (at r181254 + Bernd's patch to unbreak the tree for arm-linux-gnueabi an

Re: [PATCH] pr51038 atomic_flag on targets with no atomic support.

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:06:26 +0100 > > From: Andrew MacLeod > > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:52:44 +0100 > > On 11/10/2011 11:48 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote: > > > Justa minute > > > > > > Andrew > > doh. sor

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Benjamin Kosnik > Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 06:43:29 +0100 > So, all: > > config/cpu/*/atomicity.h And config/cpu/*/atomic_word.h presumably? > Should go. I'll look in to peeling off this cruft sharpish. brgds, H-P

Re: cxx-mem-model merge [6 of 9] - libstdc++-v3

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:45:11 +0100 > On 11/11/2011 12:43 AM, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > I think there is also an argument for single threaded-ness vs multi > threaded. If there is no atomic support and its single threaded, we > don't really need the lock... and I'm no

Re: Revert "PowerPC shrink-wrap support 3 of 3"

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:52:39 +0100 > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:12:54 +0100 > > > > From: Bernd Schmidt > > > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 14:29:04 +0100 > > > > > HP, can you run f

[RFA:] fix PR54261, reverse operator emitted for compare_and_swap-libfunc targets

If a target implements (some) atomics by only setting sync_compare_and_swap_optab libfuncs (see cris.c:cris_init_libfuncs), a code-path less travelled is used. There's a bug there, causing sync/atomic operators to be implemented with the reverse operator, e.g. minus instead of plus. This should ha

Re: [RFA:] fix PR54261, reverse operator emitted for compare_and_swap-libfunc targets

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:20:37 +0200 > I looked around and it seems only cris{v32,}-axis-linux-gnu is > affected. Still, besides that target, for a 4.7/r189762 import > and c/c++ testing, boot+regtest in progress for x86_64-linux and > cross-test

Committed: add cris-* and crisv32-* to lists in sync_int_long and sync_char_short

See also PR54261 and gcc.dg/torture/pr54261-1.c. I was about to also add an #elif defined (__CRIS__) in cas_int (which commendably uses __GCC_HAVE_SYNC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_4 but nevertheless needs to be manually enabled because of PR54266), but cas_int only guards test-cases that grep dumps for tree/

Re: combine permutations in gimple

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan > wrote: > > Of-course, the problem here is this change of semantics with the hook > > TARGET_VEC_PERM_CONST_OK. Targets were expanding to generic permutes > > with constants in the *absence* of be

Re: [bootstrap] Tentative fix for PR 54281

> From: Diego Novillo > Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 21:12:56 +0200 > On 12-08-16 15:00 , Diego Novillo wrote: > This is the patch I'm currently testing. I need someone with a very old > toolchain (4.1 or earlier) to also give this a try (the original problem > does not occur in g++ more recent than

Re: CXX conversion: min g++ version pre-requisite?

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Gary Funck wrote: > > Paul Hargrove noted the following build failure on > an older x86-32 Linux (Redhat 8.0) system. wow. old. > The g++ version is: g++ (GCC) 3.4.0 > > Currently, install.texi states: > > @heading Tools/packages necessary for building GCC > @table @a

Re: [PATCH v2, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > v2 patch differences: > - moves hook description text to target.def > - fixes error path to clear clobbers, as expected by recog_for_combine callers > > 2012-08-25 Uros Bizjak > > * target.def (reject_combined_insn): New target hook. >

Re: [PATCH v2, middle-end]: Introduce TARGET_REJECT_COMBINED_INSN target hook

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Maybe mention that the default is to allow all combinations for > > which a pattern match? And that the reason to disallow them can > > be that they're known to resu

Committed: old patch to btest-gcc.sh: Add libmudflap.sum, if it exists.

I had a nagging feeling there was a patch I didn't commit. Patch approval link, having link to the patch: (modulo obvious adjustments to copyright line) brgds, H-P

[RFA:] fix configury version checks for in-tree binutils

Found while investigating PR54373. A combined tree (in-tree binutils) using binutils post-2.22 is semi-broken at the moment: the version of the assembler and linker can't be found. The configury doesn't expect the single-quote that has "appeared"; i.e. VERSION=2.22.0 vs. VERSION='2.23.51' You

Committed, btest-gcc.sh: make fortran tests optional

Some targets, like mmix-knuth-mmixware, has fortran turned off. This patch has seen a large amount of testing, both for targets with fortran on and off. A similar patch in the past () made the libstdc++ tests optional, so I'm calling it obvi

To-be-committed: fix configure case when assembler COMDAT group support is lacking

If the out-of-tree target assembler supports neither: .section .text,"axG",@progbits,.foo,comdat (tsk tsk no leading space, though that's a red herring) nor: .section .text,"axG",%progbits,.foo,comdat then gcc/configure.ac drops through into the system-specific case seen in the patch, where for *-*

To-be-committed: correct out-of-tree .hidden support for mmix-knuth-mmixware

GCC configure should say that the linker does *not* support .hidden. For static-only linking (the only mode supported on this simulator-only system) this shouldn't really matter. But, different code is actually used (not just the attribute-hidden decorations), so different bugs are exposed. Like

Re: [MIPS, committed] Add missing COSTS_N_INSNS call.

On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote: > I'm preparing a patch to turn gcc.target/mips into a torture-like > testsuite. While on the subject of gcc.target/mips and its extensions, it also doesn't handle a build configured with --with-synci=yes. (Well, not on the 4.7 branch at least.) brgds

Re: [MIPS, committed] Add missing COSTS_N_INSNS call.

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> I'm preparing a patch to turn gcc.target/mips into a torture-like > >> testsuite. > > > > While on the subject of gcc

Re: [google/gcc-4_7, trunk] Fix problem with -fdebug-types-section and template instantiations, take 2

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Cary Coutant wrote: > 2012-08-28 Cary Coutant > > * gcc/dwarf2out.c (clone_tree_partial): Remove. > (copy_decls_walk): Don't copy children of a declaration > into a type unit. Can't say anything about the patch but watch out with the changelog entry: put

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Add a builtin to read the time base register on PowerPC

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/ppc-get-timebase.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ > > +/* { dg-do run { target { powerpc*-*-* } } } */ > > + > > +/* Test if __builtin_ppc_get_timebase() is compatible with the current > > + processor and if it's chan

Re: [PATCH] rs6000: Add a builtin to read the time base register on PowerPC

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Michael Meissner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 01:56:05PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On some systems the timebase runs at a rather low frequency, say 20MHz. > > > This test will spur

Re: [MIPS, committed] Add missing COSTS_N_INSNS call.

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Richard Sandiford writes: > > I'm testing a patch to make the testsuite work out the default > > -m{no,}synci, which ought to be enough. The usual rules should > > then kick in and force -mno-synci where necessary. Hopefully. > > Here's the patch.

Re: out-of-line and arch-specific random_device

> From: Ulrich Drepper > Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 05:57:08 +0200 This patch (commit r190787) broke build for non-_GLIBCXX_USE_RANDOM_TR1 targets. (See libstdc++-v3/configure.ac and its crossconfig.m4 for a list.) > Index: libstdc++-v3/include/bits/random.h > ==

Re: [PATCH,mmix] convert to constraints.md

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > On Thu, 2 Aug 2012, Nathan Froyd wrote: > > H-P, if you'd like to test beforehand, that'd be great. > > ...yes, I'd like to test this before, please. Thanks for your > work. (Let's set a timeout at the end

Re: Fold VEC_PERM_EXPR a little more

On Sat, 1 Sep 2012, Marc Glisse wrote: > gcc/ > * fold-const.c (fold_ternary_loc): Constant-propagate after > removing dead operands. > > gcc/testsuite/ > * gcc.dg/fold-perm.c: Improve test. (adding a line and a parameter to the function containing the test-code) JFTR: generally

ping [RFA:] fix configury version checks for in-tree binutils

Ping with CC to build maintainers. (Further pings, if any are needed, will be with URL only.) On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Found while investigating PR54373. A combined tree (in-tree binutils) > using binutils post-2.22 is semi-broken at the moment: the version of

Re: [PATCH][RFC] Add -Og

On Mon, 3 Sep 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > > This adds a new optimization level, -Og, as previously discussed. > > It aims at providing fast compilation, a superior debugging > > experience and reasonable runtime performance. Inste

Re: [middle-end] Add machine_mode to address_cost target hook

On Tue, 4 Sep 2012, Oleg Endo wrote: > On Mon, 2012-09-03 at 01:58 +0200, Oleg Endo wrote: > > OKOK -- I'll do it :) > > (within the next couple of days) > > > > And so I did. Attached is an updated patch that adds the address space > parameter to the address_cost function. I hope that this chan

Re: [PATCH] Add -fmem-report-wpa

On Thu, 6 Sep 2012, Andi Kleen wrote: > From: Andi Kleen > Passed bootstrap and testsuite on x86_64. > +++ b/gcc/lto/lto.c > @@ -2016,6 +2016,8 @@ do_whole_program_analysis (void) >/* Show the LTO report before launching LTRANS. */ >if (flag_lto_report) > print_lto_report (); > +

Re: [middle-end] Add machine_mode to address_cost target hook

Oleg Endo wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 14:41 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > > The change is definitely in the right direction, but I wonder > > how it helps to fix code bloats of 300%-400% as in PR52543? > > I'm not familiar with the AVR parts. > BTW, There was a small change in lower-subreg wh

Re: [PATCH,mmix] convert to constraints.md

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Sorry, but I need more time to get > test-results for a recent trunk revision to a state where > testing patches makes sense. I'll test the patch and commit > that or a variant.

Re: [PATCH,mmix] convert to constraints.md

On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Nathan Froyd wrote: > - Original Message - > > Nathan, again thanks. There are a few minor tweaks compared to your > > version: > > Thanks for fixing this up! > > > - Keeping old layout of "mmix_reg_or_8bit_operand". That looked like > > a spurious change and I pref

Re: [PATCH,mmix] convert to constraints.md

On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, 12 Sep 2012, Nathan Froyd wrote: > > > - Keeping old layout of "mmix_reg_or_8bit_operand". That looked like > > > a spurious change and I prefer the ior construct to the > > > if_then_else. >

Re: [committed] Fix g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/nested-3.C to handle hppa assembler comment

> From: John David Anglin > Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 19:13:19 +0200 > This adjusts the regexp to work on hppa. Tested on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 > and hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. Committed to trunk. > 2012-09-16 John David Anglin > > PR debug/54460 > * g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/nested-3.C: Add

Re: [Patch] PR54635: Add addr_space_t argument to mode_dependent_address_p

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > mode_dependent_address_p is not sensitive to the address space of the passed > address. Thus, add an addr_space_t parameter to the hook. Borderline obvious. :) (J/k; the added functionality seems obvious but the implementation may have non-obvious i

Re: [Patch] PR54635: Add addr_space_t argument to mode_dependent_address_p

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > >> mode_dependent_address_p is not sensitive to the address space of the > >> passed > >> address. Thus, add an addr_space_t parameter to the hook. >

Re: [patch] PR54645 move location_adhoc_data map into GC

On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Dehao Chen wrote: > This patch moves location_adhoc_data into GC, and also rebuild the > hash table when reading in the PCH. After the patch, PCH can work as > expected. > > Bootstrapped and passed gcc regression tests on x8664_linux. If you have a moment to consider improveme

Re: Committed: atomic support for CRIS

96.62.19 > 76.96.62.24 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > MIME-Version: 1.0 > > On Jun 12, 2012, at 4:47 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >> From: Richard Henderson > >> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 23:04:02 +0200 > > Putting a lot of trust onto users and libr

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add atomic_compare_and_swap, atomic_exchange and atomic_fetch_add patterns.

On Thu, 14 Jun 2012, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > On 14/06/2012, at 6:33 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > Maxim Kuvyrkov writes: > >> +/* Subroutines of the mips_process_sync_loop. > >> + Emit barriers as needed for the memory MODEL. */ > >> + > >> +static bool > >> +mips_emit_pre_atomic_barrier_p (

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Add atomic_compare_and_swap, atomic_exchange and atomic_fetch_add patterns.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > On 15/06/2012, at 8:51 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > While you're editing in these parts, how about making this > > "bool emit_atomic_barrier_p (enum memmodel, bool pre)" and move it to > > the middle-end, say

Ping*2: [RFA:] fix bug in configure header-probing for stack protector support in target C library

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 02:31:10 +0200 > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 01:38:22 +0200 > > > gcc: > > Fix configure test for "stack protector support in target C library". > > * configure

[RFA:] Caveat for ARM in gcc-4.7/changes.html: unaligned accesses, take 2

Y is 28 for introduction of the quoted code in arch/arm/mm/alignment.c, AFAICT, so how about this one, ok now? Index: changes.html === RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.113 diff -p -u -r1.1

Re: [patch] Deal with #ident without

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote: > I've now committed this, see r188791. Breaking cris-elf. Just try rebuilding cc1: ./gcc/gcc/../libdecnumber/dpd -I../libdecnumber\ /tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/config/cris/cris.c -o cris.o /tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/config/cr

Re: [patch] Remove NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C target macro

On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote: > The attached patch removes NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C, and replaces its sole > user with IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C to avoid the double negations (#ifndef > NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C, etc.). > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk? I saw it w

Re: [Ping] Fix gcc/gcov.c and libgcc/libgcov.c to fix build on VxWorks

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012, rbmj wrote: > There is an alternate solution- I could use fixincludes to add a macro to wrap > over mkdir on VxWorks. A couple of possible ways to do this: > > 1. Define a normal macro to posix-ify it, i.e. #define mkdir(a, b) > ((mkdir)(a)). Since this would hide single-arg

Ping: [RFA:] Caveat for ARM in gcc-4.7/changes.html: unaligned accesses, take 2

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200 A ping. > Y is 28 for introduction of the quoted code in > arch/arm/mm/alignment.c, AFAICT, so how about this one, ok now? > > Index: changes.html > =

Ping*3: [RFA:] fix bug in configure header-probing for stack protector support in target C library

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:48:35 +0200 > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 02:31:10 +0200 > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > > Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 01:38:22 +0200 > > > > > gcc: > > >

Re: [patch] Remove and poison a few more old target macros

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012, Steven Bosscher wrote: > * doc/tm.texi.in: Remove UNALIGNED_INT_ASM_OP reference from the > documentation. > * doc/tm.texi: Regenerate. > * doc/cpp.texi: Make example for #error generic. > * config/frv/frv.h: Fix example text to match tm.texi. FWI

Re: Ping: [RFA:] Caveat for ARM in gcc-4.7/changes.html: unaligned accesses, take 2

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:24:01 +0200 > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200 > > A ping. And another ping, now CCing ARM maintainers, <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-06/msg00983.html>. >

Ping*4: [RFA:] fix bug in configure header-probing for stack protector support in target C library

> From: "Joseph S. Myers" > Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:09:42 +0200 > On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > > > > Fix configure test for "stack protector support in target C > > > > > library". > > >

Fix gcc.dg/lower-subreg-1.c failure, revisited.

> From: Richard Sandiford > Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 11:14:49 +0200 > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > >> From: Richard Sandiford > >> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 16:46:38 +0200 > > > >> To repeat: as things stand, very few targets define proper rtx costs >

Ping again: [RFA:] Caveat for ARM in gcc-4.7/changes.html: unaligned accesses, take 2

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:06:44 +0200 > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:24:01 +0200 > > > > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 04:07:23 +0200 > > > > A ping. >

Re: PR 51094 - fprint_w() in output_addr_const() reinstated

On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Dimitrios Apostolou wrote: > Since output_addr_const() shows pretty hot in the compiler, I reinstated the > fprint_w() call in place of fprintf(). > > This patch relies on two things: 2's complement representation for negative > int and that HOST_WIDE_INT is at least as large ty

Re: [PATCH] [LM32] Fix lm32-elf-gcc build error by remove unnecessary constant legitimate check.

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, Jia Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > When I build lm32-elf-gcc, it failed at libgcc configure due to > lm32-elf-cc1 segment fault when compile conftest.c: > > void bar (); > void clean (int *); > void foo () > { > int i __attribute__ ((cleanup (clean))); > bar(); > } > > Then I fin

Re: [PATCH] [LM32] Fix lm32-elf-gcc build error by remove unnecessary constant legitimate check.

On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Jia Liu wrote: > May you > give me more comment? I wanna fix it. Sorry, I'll leave that to the lm32 maintainer, I just wasnted to clear a misunderstanding regarding TARGET_LEGITIMATE_CONSTANT_P. brgds, H-P

Re: Fix gcc.dg/lower-subreg-1.c failure, revisited.

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 01:02:34 +0200 PR rtl-optimization/53176 > * rtlanal.c (rtx_cost): Adjust default cost for X with a > UNITS_PER_WORD factor for all X according to the size of > its mode, not just for SUBREGs with

Re: Fix PR53908

> From: Richard Sandiford > Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:18:54 +0200 > if (CALL_P (insn)) > { > if (RTL_CONST_OR_PURE_CALL_P (insn)) > /* Pure functions can read from memory. Const functions can > read from arguments that the ABI has forced onto the stack.

Re: Fix PR53908

> From: Richard Guenther > Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:37:13 +0200 > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Steven Bosscher > wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > > wrote: > >>> From: Richard Sandiford > >>> Date: Thu, 12 J

Re: Fix PR53908

> From: Richard Guenther > Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 10:08:05 +0200 > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > > Ok for 4.7 too? > > Of course. Committed to trunk as follows, including the test-case which doesn't fail on trunk but does on 4.6

CRIS atomics revisited 0/4: summary

These were spotted while debugging usage of atomics within glibc. The kind of changes are microoptimizations, nanooptimizations, a buglet and a major issue. Micro: the load-store-conditional sequence for compare-and-swap I originally committed was an earlier version improved later. Nanooptimizati

CRIS atomics revisited 1/4: use need_atomic_barrier_p.

Use the new need_atomic_barrier_p. gcc: * config/cris/sync.md ("atomic_fetch_") ("atomic_compare_and_swap"): Gate expand_mem_thread_fence calls on result of call to need_atomic_barrier_p. Index: config/cris/sync.md ==

CRIS atomics revisited 2/4: don't allow a memory operand (with possible side-effects)

Buglet in "atomic_compare_and_swap", allowing (in theory) a volatile or post-increment memory operand. Simplest and safest fixed by excluding all memory operands. gcc: * config/cris/sync.md ("atomic_compare_and_swap"): Change predicate to nonmemory_operand for operand 3. Add FIXM

CRIS atomics revisited 3/4: pattern improvements

Microoptimizations for the atomic patterns themselves. Constant operands are so common that it seems wasteful not to handle the most common cases and avoid wasting a register. gcc/testsuite: * gcc.target/cris/20011127-1.c: Adjust to %P being a valid register operand output modifie

CRIS atomics revisited 4/4: give up on alignment of atomic data, RFC for is_lock_free hook

Well, give up by default that is, and fix it up in a helper function in glibc to hold a global byte-sized atomic lock for the duration. (Sorry!) Yes, this means that fold_builtin_atomic_always_lock_free is wrong. It knows about alignment in general but doesn't handle the case where the default a

Fixing gcc.c-torture/compile/pr44707.c for CRIS v32 1/2.

Buglet in cris_preferred_reload_class, incidental, apparently without effect at least regarding failing test-cases. A class disjunct from the input was returned as "preferred". It could arguably be gcc_asserted as a sanity-check by the caller that the returned class is a subset of the original cl

Fixing gcc.c-torture/compile/pr44707.c for CRIS v32 2/2: RFC: CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P and its default are evil!

I think CONSTANT_ADDRESS_P can and should be eliminated, replaced by something like CONSTANT_P (x) && targetm.legitimate_address_p (QImode, x, false) (or QImode replaced by the known used mode) in the code currently calling it. It should, because the default definition is redundant and evil; easy

Re: CRIS atomics revisited 4/4: give up on alignment of atomic data

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 05:49:00 +0200 > gcc: > * config/cris/sync.md ("atomic_fetch_") > ("cris_atomic_fetch__1") > ("atomic_compare_and_swap") > ("cris_atomic_compare_and_swap_1"):

Re: CRIS atomics revisited 4/4: give up on alignment of atomic data, RFC for is_lock_free hook

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:24:48 +0200 > On 07/15/2012 11:49 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Well, give up by default that is, and fix it up in a helper > > function in glibc to hold a global byte-sized atomic lock for > > the duration. (So

Re: CRIS atomics revisited 4/4: give up on alignment of atomic data, RFC for is_lock_free hook

> From: Andrew MacLeod > Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:24:48 +0200 > Any PR's you open related this this, copy me on them and I'll try to get > them addressed. I could separate the issues I saw into PRs 54003-6. That's all, hopefully ...at least for now. :) BTW, your @gcc.gnu.org account doesn't

Re: Commit: ARM: Document -munaligned-access

> From: Nick Clifton > Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:51:16 +0200 > 2012-07-18 Nick Clifton > > * doc/invoke.texi (ARM Options): Document -munaligned-access. > > Index: gcc/doc/invoke.texi > === > --- gcc/doc/invoke.texi

<    11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   >