Re: [lra] patch mostly implementing pseudo live range split

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > 3. The patch rewrite the way of dealing with the secondary memory >moves in constraint pass of LRA. Previously we generated secondary >moves if macro SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED says so. Unfortunately, the >macro is usually defined inaccurate

Re: Adjust omp-low test for alignment

On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > but futexes must be 32-bit aligned (or at least not cross page > boundaries). Don't mix up futexes with hardware-mandated atomic alignment (except that preferably the letter should not be more strict). Linux futexes must be 32-bit aligned *for all ar

Re: [PATCH 5/6] mips: Implement vec_perm_const.

On Thu, 8 Dec 2011, Richard Henderson wrote: > diff --git a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c > index d3fd709..f1c3665 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/mips/mips.c > +++ b/gcc/config/mips/mips.c > @@ -13021,8 +13015,8 @@ static const struct mips_builtin_description > mips_builtins[] = { >

Re: [PATCH 5/6] mips: Implement vec_perm_const.

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote: > [Mingjie, please could you help with the Loongson question near the end?] > As H-P mentioned, this changes the __builtin_* interface for the PSHUFH > intrinsics. These intrinsics are supposed to be used via the inline > wrappers in loongson.h, so we

Re: [PATCH 5/6] mips: Implement vec_perm_const.

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > Please also consider incrementing __mips_loongson_vector_rev > For avoidance of doubt, that only applies to the latter ("as H-P > suggests") option. The patch as posted keeps the public inter

Re: Fix flags for edges from/to entry/exit basic blocks (issue5486043)

(Please don't forget to CC gcc-patches on replies. Thanks.) > From: Dmitriy Vyukov > Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:43:10 +0100 > Fix flags for edges from/to entry/exit basic blocks. > W/o this patch I hit internal asserts when trying to > split the edge from entry block. > > Index: gcc/cgraphunit.

Re: Fix flags for edges from/to entry/exit basic blocks (issue5486043)

> From: Dmitry Vyukov > Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 11:43:18 +0100 > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > > Details in PR51521. > Sorry for the trouble. What should I do now? Do what Diego and others asked, roll back your patch immediately; I see i

testsuite typo fixed in "[PATCH, PR51491] add CLOBBER before __builtin_stack_restore" when converting vla alloca_with_align to array decl

> From: Tom de Vries > Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:23:27 +0100 > bootstrapped and reg-tested (ada inclusive) on x86_64. Time to update your inspection script: there's a missing sanity check for the number of passes. I suggest you re-run regtests for the main change with the below patch applied.

Re: testsuite typo fixed in "[PATCH, PR51491] add CLOBBER before __builtin_stack_restore" when converting vla alloca_with_align to array decl

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 09:32:36 +0100 > Typos like this cause the test-run to be aborted for the current > .exp file, > In this case, some 3000 test-cases went missing, judging by the > "gcc Summary" output. Correction: not just the .ex

Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR 51128, scan failures with -fno-fat-lto-objects

On Mon, 5 Dec 2011, Uros Bizjak wrote: > Hello! > > Just skip these tests when -fno-fat-lto-objects was added to options. > > 2011-12-05 Uros Bizjak > > PR testsuite/51128 > * gcc.dg/torture/pr23821.c: Skip if -fno-fat-lto-objects was passed. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr39074.c: Ditto

Re: Keep static VTA locs in cselib tables only

> From: Alexandre Oliva > Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:57:24 +0100 > * cselib.h (cselib_add_permanent_equiv): Declare. > (canonical_cselib_val): New. > * cselib.c (new_elt_loc_list): Rework to support value > equivalences. Adjust all callers. > (preserve_only

Fix cross-builds broken from C++-creep

All cross-builds are "still" done as C. In C++ you don't need the missing struct qualifier or the typedef in "typedef struct gfc_expr ... gfc_expr;" (the struct declaration suffices) as there's no separate struct namespace IIUC. Doesn't this show a bug in the compatibility warning system, or is t

Re: Keep static VTA locs in cselib tables only

> From: Alexandre Oliva > Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 20:35:39 +0100 > On Jan 2, 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > This (r182760) caused regressions in the libstdc++ testsuite for > > cris-elf, PR51728. > On Jan 2, 2012, Andreas Krebbel wrote: > > this seem to have

binutils et al broken from "C++/libiberty PATCH for many mangling fixes (6057, 48051, 50855, 51322 and more)"

> From: Jason Merrill > Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 22:38:28 +0100 > include/ > * demangle.h (enum demangle_component_type): Add > DEMANGLE_COMPONENT_INITIALIZER_LIST, DEMANGLE_COMPONENT_NULLARY. > > diff --git a/include/demangle.h b/include/demangle.h > index 98b11d7..34b3ed3 1006

Re: [Ping] RE: CR16 Port addition

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 01/11/2012 11:50 PM, Jayant R. Sonar wrote: > > I don't have commit rights. Please let me know how to proceed. > > http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/pdw/ps_form.cgi > > will take care of the commit rights part. I don't see anything matching in copy

Re: [Ping] RE: CR16 Port addition

On Wed, 11 Jan 2012, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > I don't see anything matching in copyright.list, which has to be > > in place first. No blanket assignment for KPIT or KPIT Cummins. > > Maybe I'm missing somet

Cross-build breakage with libstdc++-v3 doc changes

> From: Benjamin Kosnik > Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:41:59 +0100 > This updates the support for generating epub docs to EPUB3. Using the > EPUB3 stylesheets allows the removal of ruby and other tool checks from > configure, and generates a much better documentation file. ...or for cross-targets,

Re: [PATCH][4.8] C++ memory model bitfield handling rewrite

On Tue, 7 Feb 2012, Richard Guenther wrote: > The following patch rewrites the bitfield handling of the C++ memory > model and enables it unconditionally to fix PR52080. As I suggested > earlier at some point this moves computation of what the memory model > considers the underlying object we may

Re: [libitm] Link with -litm and -pthread

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Hi, > > this completes the half-implemented linking scheme of libitm and makes it > mimic > that of libgomp entirely. We need the -pthread thing on Solaris 8. It broke all targets that don't implement threads and as such don't support -pthread. And yo

Re: [libitm] Link with -litm and -pthread

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > It broke all targets that don't implement threads and as such > > don't support -pthread. And you need to gate *all* tm-related > > tests on something like check_effective_target_pthread. > > The question is, how is libitm supposed to work on these sys

Fix testsuite regressions with -fgnu-tm

> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 03:30:44 +0100 > you need to gate *all* tm-related > tests on something like check_effective_target_pthread. Like this, tested cris-elf, fixes the regressions, does the same as -fopenmp. Ok? gcc/testsuite: * lib/target-

Re: [RFC, 4.8] Magic matching for flags clobbering and setting

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012, Richard Henderson wrote: > Seeing as how Uros is starting to go down the path of cleaning up the > flags handling for x86, I thought I'd go ahead and knock up the idea > that I've been tossing around to help automate the process of building > patterns that match both clobbering

Re: PR middle-end/52373: two pc_rtxs, etc.

> From: Richard Sandiford > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:58:42 +0100 > This patch fixed PR 52373, ITYM 52372. > Tested on mips-sde-elf with rtl checking enabled. There were no > differences. Also tested with a mips-sgi-irix6.5 cc1 cross to verify > that it fixes the bug. OK to install? > > Ric

Re: RFA: patch to fix PR48971

On Fri, 13 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > The following patch solves the problem described on > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48971 > > The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86-64 and checked for ppc64, ia64, > i686-linux, i686-apple-darwin, mips, arm, s390x, and sparc with

Re: C6X port 4/11: Backtracking scheduler

On Tue, 10 May 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On C6X, every jump instruction has 5 delay slots which can be filled > with normally scheduled instructions. With an issue width of 8 > insns/cycle, this means that up to 40 insns can be issued after the jump > insn before the jump's side-effect takes pla

Re: C6X port 9/11: Allow defining attributes in terms of another

On Tue, 10 May 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > I've found it useful to use a construct such as the following: > > (define_attr "units64" > "unknown,d,d_addr,l,m,s,dl,ds,dls,ls" > (const_string "unknown")) > > (define_attr "units64p" > "unknown,d,d_addr,l,m,s,dl,ds,dls,ls" > (attr "units64"))

Re: C6X port 9/11: Allow defining attributes in terms of another

On Wed, 25 May 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > I'm not sure where you're looking for added documentation for this > patch. I guess no surprise that'd be md.texi node Defining Attributes, or an updated example in node Attr Example since the documentation for "default" basically just refers to it. Or

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > This patch solves http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49154 for CRIS. > The problem was in that the pressure classes did not contain SRP register and > the assert failed. I'm not sure I understand the basic requirement. > OK to commit? > > 2

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > On 11-05-25 6:58 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > > > > This patch solves http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49154 for > > > CRIS. > > > The proble

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Thu, 26 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > On 05/26/2011 04:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > It sounds like you're saying that "the narrowest register > > classes must be formed of registers for which there

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Thu, 26 May 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Good, a way forward (well, for me) even though the cure is > suspiciously incidental. Thanks for your patience. JFTR, setting CRIS_CC0_REGNUM to fixed just moves the assert to trig at the same place in the v10 multilib, where CRIS_MOF_REG

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Thu, 26 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > On 05/26/2011 04:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > On Wed, 25 May 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > It sounds like you're saying that "the narrowest register > > classes must be formed of registers for which there

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Sat, 28 May 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > +You must define the narrowest register class for a register so that > +class either has no subclasses, or that for some mode, the move cost > +between registers within the class are cheaper than moving a register Bah: "is c

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Tue, 31 May 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Hans-Peter Nilsson writes: > > Index: tm.texi.in > > === > > --- tm.texi.in (revision 174376) > > +++ tm.texi.in (working copy) > > @@ -

Re: RFA: another patch to solve PR49154

On Tue, 31 May 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Gah, seems like I'd forgotten the "no subclasses" bit by the time > I started looking at code. Sorry for the false alarm. Still, the extra look made me realise that I should have restricted that statement to allocatable registers. (And I really do

Committed: fix PR49285, breakage building libgcc2 for MMIX

I needed a baseline for PR48542 (problems with setjmp/longjmp), but building MMIX was broken on trunk. It was "bitten" by the fixups to predicate matching done recentlish. The comment above the MMIX truncdfsf2 expander complains about having to use an expander to force an operand to memory - and

Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition

On Thu, 26 May 2011, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > Yes please. I've been arguing for that for some time. > > Since you feel so strongly about it and nobody objects, go ahead. Backport to open branches? (And note PR48825.) brgds, H-P

FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES in ira-costs.c

There's a lot of dead code inside the obsolete (removed in 2009) and nowhere else set #ifdef FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES. Remove and poison? I'd say borderline obvious, but maybe there's instead reason to reinstate it, if that code is tested and supposed to be live. brgds, H-P

Fix PR49154-related SEGV in IRA. And ping.

First, a ping for ; updated regclass documentation. Ok? Second, I updated the CRIS port to fit the proposed documentation update (adding a class as the patch you sent, but more complete), with regtest results clean for revisions before the

Re: Remove SETJMP_VIA_SAVE_AREA support

On Thu, 2 Jun 2011, Eric Botcazou wrote: > This removes the (undocumented) support for SETJMP_VIA_SAVE_AREA from the > compiler. Poison it (in system.h)? brgds, H-P

CRIS regclass update, fixing build breakage

Updating register classes so that the narrowest class for the SRP register is now a singleton class, instead of having other register members without means to move to/from SRP cheaper than memory, matching the documentation update. Also fixing the buglet of not fixing the condition-code-register,

Re: Fix PR49154-related SEGV in IRA. And ping.

On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, H.J. Lu wrote: > >        PR rtl-optimization/49154 > >        * ira-costs.c (setup_regno_cost_classes_by_mode): If there > >        already is a matching slot in the hashtable, assign it to > >        classes_ptr. > > > > This caused: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg

Re: FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES in ira-costs.c

On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > On 06/08/2011 12:37 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > There's a lot of dead code inside the obsolete (removed in 2009) > > and nowhere else set #ifdef FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES. > > Remove and poison? > > > Yes, I

Re: Remove SETJMP_VIA_SAVE_AREA support

On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Poison it (in system.h)? > > Let's keep pretending that it never existed. :-) No can do. It had been there for too many releases (even one is one too many), at least 13 years according to the ChangeLogs. I even went looking for it for PR48542 having a

Re: FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES in ira-costs.c

On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > * ira-costs.c: Remove #ifdefs on dead FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES. > Adjust comments. > * system.h (FORBIDDEN_INC_DEC_CLASSES): Poison. > Index:

Re: [patch, testsuite] Fix g++.dg/opt/devirt2.C scanning, PR 48727

On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Steve Ellcey wrote: > I will check in this testsuite fix as obvious if there are no objections. But... :) > On IA64 and HPPA the test generates global declarations for the function > as well as calls so the scan-assembler-times fails because it finds the > declarations as we

Fix PR48542: reload register contents reuse crossing setjmp

A generic bug found in one of the less common targets. The MMIX port usually saves the return-address from the special-register rJ to a general call-saved register (helped by get_hard_reg_initial_val), restored to rJ immediately on return from the call. I know, the "restore immediately on return"

Re: regrename: don't update REG_DEAD notes

On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > We're updating REG_DEAD notes in regrename.c, but it seems this is for > historical reasons only. As far as I can tell, every pass that needs > such notes recomputes them with df_note_add_problem/df_analyze, and the > following patch bootstrapped and test

Re: Cgraph alias reorg 15/14 (New infrastructure for same body aliases)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011, Jan Hubicka wrote: > Hi, > this patch complettes the same body alias rework by removing the old same body > alias code and adding new representation. Same body aliases are now separate > function nodes that have IPA_REF_ALIAS reference to the node they are alias > of. > > I

Re: [x32] PATCH: Remove ix86_promote_function_mode

ters (or rather, requiring non-pointers to having already been zero extended) is a security concern. I thought I'd made that point clear already. This is a hideously critical distinction. > Peter, do you think it is safe to assume upper 32bits are zero in > user space for x32? Kernel isn'

Re: Cgraph alias reorg 15/14 (New infrastructure for same body aliases)

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> > On Sat, 11 Jun 2011, Jan Hubicka wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > this patch complettes the same body alias rework by removing the old > >> > > same body > >> > > alias code and adding

Re: [x32] PATCH: Remove ix86_promote_function_mode

On 06/20/2011 07:43 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:33 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 06/20/2011 07:01 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Bernd Schmidt >>> wrote: >>>> On 06/20/2011 03:51 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >&

Removing target-libiberty (was: Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition)

On Wed, 18 May 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Wed, 18 May 2011, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > At this point, though, I'm tempted to say "there's no such thing as a > > target libiberty" and rip all the target-libiberty rules out, and let > > Yes please. I've been arguing for that for some time. > > h

Re: [x32] PATCH: Remove ix86_promote_function_mode

On 06/20/2011 03:49 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: >> >> As I have already stated, if we *cannot* require pointers to be >> zero-extended on entry to the kernel, we're going to have to have >> special entry points for all the x32 system calls except the ones that >> don't take pointers. > > If it's

Re: [x32] PATCH: Remove ix86_promote_function_mode

Richard Henderson wrote: >On 06/20/2011 04:39 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> sys_foo: >> cmpl$10, %edi >> jae .L1 >> >> movqfoo_table(,%rdi,3), %rax >> retq >> .L1: >> movq$-EINVAL, %rax >> r

Re: [Patch, AVR]: Fix PR46779

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > [In CCing Richard Henderson] > Denis Chertykov schrieb: > > 2011/6/10 Georg-Johann Lay : > > > Then I observed trouble with DI patterns during libgcc build and had > > > to remove > > > > > > * "zero_extendqidi2" > > > * "zero_extendhidi2" > > > * "ze

Re: Improve jump threading #5 of N

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, Jeff Law wrote: > So as I've mentioned previously, I've been working on a relatively small > change to the jump threading code which would allow it to duplicate a > join block when doing so allows us to thread through a successor of the > join block. This is expected to be the

Regression with "varpool alias reorg"

On Sat, 18 Jun 2011, Jan Hubicka wrote: > * lto-symtab.c (lto_varpool_replace_node): Remove code handling > extra name aliases. > (lto_symtab_resolve_can_prevail_p): Likewise. > (lto_symtab_merge_cgraph_nodes): Update alias_of pointers. > * cgraphbuild.c (record_refer

Re: Removing target-libiberty (was: Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition)

> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:58:41 + (UTC) > From: "Joseph S. Myers" > On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > It seems none in approval capacity have any objection to > > (figuratively) s/target-libiberty//g in toplevel/configure.ac on > &

Re: [PATCH][RFC][2/2] Bitfield lowering

On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > This implements lowering a subset of COMPONENT_REFs with DECL_BIT_FIELD > FIELD_DECLs and BIT_FIELD_REFs - thus bitfield operations in general. > It lowers those to memory loads/stores that the (non-strict-align) target > is able to carry out, adjusti

Re: Removing target-libiberty (was: Re: Libiberty: POSIXify psignal definition)

> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:16:48 +0200 > From: Hans-Peter Nilsson > > PR47836 > PR23656 > PR47733 > PR49247 > * configure.ac (target_libraries): Remove target-libiberty. ... JFTR, that's not proper PR annotation. I changed it as ob

Re: Cgraph alias reorg 15/14 (New infrastructure for same body aliases)

On Sun, 19 Jun 2011, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > On Sat, 11 Jun 2011, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > this patch complettes the same body alias rework by removing the old > > > > same body > > > > alias code and adding new representation. Same body aliases are now > > > > separate > >

Re: [PATCH][RFC][2/2] Bitfield lowering

On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > > > >> This implements lowering a subset of COMPONENT_REFs with DECL_BIT_FIELD > >> FIELD_DECL

Re: [Patch, AVR]: Fix PR46779

On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > Hans-Peter Nilsson schrieb: > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2011, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > >> [In CCing Richard Henderson] > >> Denis Chertykov schrieb: > >>> 2011/6/10 Georg-Johann Lay : > > > >>>>

Re: [Patch, AVR]: Fix PR46779

Sorry for the earlier semi-empty mail (just quoting G-J), I meant to cancel it. Happy midsummer. brgds, H-P

[RFA:] Removing target-libiberty on branches

Here's the patch I tested for 4.6, native x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, cross to cris-axis-elf, both with old and new ("breaking") newlib. Ok for 4.6 and after testing, earlier branches? 2011-06-22 Hans-Peter Nilsson PR regression/47836 PR bootstrap/23656

Re: [RFA:] Removing target-libiberty on branches

> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:14:13 +0200 > From: Richard Guenther > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > > Here's the patch I tested for 4.6, native > > x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, cross to cris-axis-elf, both with old > > and new (&qu

Re: [patch] Fix oversight in tuplification of DOM

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Hi, > > the attached testcase triggers an ICE when compiled at -O or above, on all the > open branches. This is a regression introduced with the tuplification. The > problem is that 2 ARRAY_RANGE_REFs are recognized as equivalent, although they > don't

Re: MAINTAINERS: update my email address

On Fri, 27 May 2011, Nathan Froyd wrote: (Setting maintainer point-of-contact to @gcc.gnu.org) Please, anyone setting their contact adress to point at gcc.gnu.org, test that it works to send email from somewhere else than gcc.gnu.org, from an adress with a domain setting SPF records. No MX betwee

Committed: robustify CRIS ASM_OUTPUT_CASE_END

The recent dwarf2 changes caused notes to be emitted between the CRIS (casesi expanded to sort-of) tablejump and the jump-table. I know RTH solved that particular problem another way (thanks!), but the documented adjacency promise is about of instructions, not notes, so it seems appropriate to also

Committed, cris-elf: Don't compile crtstuff.c with debug info

The $(LIBGCC2_CFLAGS) removed in the patch is prehistoric (before first commit in the FSF repo) but was once needed or at least seemed like a good idea; I can't recall which. These days, its major effect is to add "-g", which with the recent dwarf2 changes is lethal, if you're unlucky. With the d

Re: Add __builtin_clrsb, similar to clz/ctz

On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > New patch below. Retested on i686 and bfin. Yay, bikeshedding opportunity! :P Can we call them "leading *repeated* sign bits"? (in docs and comments) Calling them "redundant" makes you think the representation is not two's complement but new and improv

Re: Ping: C-family stack check for threads

On Sun, 3 Jul 2011, Thomas Klein wrote: > Ye Joey wrote: > > Thomas, > > > > I think your are working on a very useful feature. I have ARM MCU > > applications running of out stack space and resulting strange > > behaviors silently. I'd like to try your patch and probably give > > further comm

Re: Fix PR48542: reload register contents reuse crossing setjmp

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Jeff Law wrote: > > On 06/15/11 21:46, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > > PR rtl-optimization/48542 > > > * reload.c (find_equiv_reg): Stop looking when finding a > > > setjmp-type call. > > > * reload

Re: [MMIX] Hookize PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P

On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, Anatoly Sokolov wrote: > Hi. > > This patch removes obsolete PRINT_OPERAND, PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and > PRINT_OPERAND_PUNCT_VALID_P macros from MMIX back end in the GCC and > introduces equivalent TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND, TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_ADDRESS and > TARGET_PRINT_OPERAND_P

Re: Split insn-attr.h

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > (In checking for such files - > there aren't that many - I also noticed that the target macro > DELAY_SLOTS_FOR_EPILOGUE is used and documented but not defined by any > target, so the code relating to that macro is ripe for removal and > poisoning of th

Fix PR48675: 20_util/hash/chi2_quality.cc timeout for simulator targets

See PR48675 for details. It also mentions a secondary issue, a performance regression introduced in 172607:172613 after an improvement introduced in 172417:172431. If you look at the test, it has this nice line, // { dg-options "-std=gnu++0x -DSAMPLES=1" { target simulator } } (the default SA

Re: [testsuite]: Skip some tests for avr

On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: > This patchlet skips some tests for avr because int is just 16 bits there. > 2011-04-19 Georg-Johann Lay > > * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr43191.c: Skip avr due to 16-bit int. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr43165.c: Ditto. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr4

Re: [pph] Macro Validation Correction (issue4425041)

On Sat, 16 Apr 2011, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 22:01, Lawrence Crowl wrote: > > +unsigned char too_many_directives_for_bitfield[ > > +        N_DIRECTIVES <= (1 << CPP_HASHNODE_INDEX_BITS) > > +        ? 1 : -1]; > > Heh, I'm not sure what to think of this trick. I think I lik

Re: Get rid of warning in dwarf2out.c

On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Eric Botcazou wrote: > Compiling dwarf2out.c with older versions of GCC yields a warning because > is_redundant_typedef has a prototype without the 'inline' keyboard and a > declaration with it, and is called from another function in-between. Shouldn't there be a warning from

Re: [patch gimplifier]: Do folding on truth and/or trees

On Wed, 27 Apr 2011, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > You don't need to build cross binutils, all that is needed is > configure the cross and build just cc1, don't mind that the build > fails afterwards and just run it on your testcases by hand to see > what is in the dumps. FWIW "make all-gcc" doesn't fail

Committed: fd_truncate test-cases updated for recent libgfortran changes

Once or twice a year some regression results from changed I/O in libgfortran, such that some existing test-case starts calling libgfortran/io/unix.c:raw_truncate, which on limited-I/O-bare-iron targets will emit "required ftruncate or chsize support not present" and fail. After a while, I get to i

Re: Committed: fd_truncate test-cases updated for recent libgfortran changes

> Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 19:36:47 +0300 > From: Janne Blomqvist > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 00:52, Hans-Peter Nilsson > wrote: > > This time, it happened in 173155:173168. > > > > Usually, there's also a brief question whether all changes were > > intende

Re: [PATCH] Cleanup expand_shift

On Thu, 5 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Wed, 4 May 2011, Richard Guenther wrote: > > On Wed, 4 May 2011, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > Hm. I guess people will scream if something breaks (I can't imagine > > what though). AAAaaarghh! Building cris-elf is now broken. > I have applied the foll

Re: [v3] typeinfo tuning

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > This is versioned for 4.6.0, but I'll wait a day or two to see how it > goes before I plead with the RMs. It broke build, hopefully for trivial reasons. It seems like your bugzilla options are set to not receive email, so I'll have to bug you like thi

Re: [v3] regex versioned namespaces

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > > Ugh. While doing other things I realized that the namespace versioning > for regex header files is off: it's not on the inner-most nested > namespace. > > Fixed thusly. But it seems like it's not committed? brgds, H-P

Re: [wwwdocs] gcc-4.6/porting_to.html

On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Benjamin Kosnik wrote: > Needs some more work, here's a rough draft. s/Porting to the new tools/Porting to the new version/ ? brgds, H-P

Re: RFA: patch to solve IRA PR48336, PR48342, PR48345

On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > 2011-03-29 Vladimir Makarov > > PR target/48336 > PR middle-end/4834 (A typo here, 48342. Or maybe also needed for 48334?) > PR rtl-optimization/48345 > * ira-color.c (setup_conflict_profitable_regs): Exclude prohib

Re: RFA: patch to solve IRA PR48336, PR48342, PR48345

On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > FWIW, I have a five regressions for cris-elf too appearing at > that RA change, but as they're wrong-code and noticed only at > execution, I'm going to wait analyzing further until this is > committed and caught by my autote

Re: Continue toplevel cleanup (GCC library handling for unsupported targets etc.)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > Other cleanups here: > cris*-*-none acts just like cris*-*-elf in > config.gcc so it's appropriate to make the "*" subcase of cris*-*-* act > like the -elf case; 'k. > mmix-*-* disabled "libgloss", i.e. libgloss for the > host, which is never built a

Re: [patch, ARM] Make 128 bits the default vector size for NEON

> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 13:39:05 +0200 > From: Ira Rosen > This patch changes NEON's default vector size from 64 to 128 bits. I'm wondering, are there NEON-specific measurements to support this change? A colleague of mine implemented support for 64- and 128-bit NEON for RAPP

Re: Target header etc. cleanup patch

On Sat, 2 Apr 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > * cris-protos.h had an unused STDIO_INCLUDED definition, which I > removed. Been there since the first commit, it seems. Certainly this bit is ok. A nit: you had several lines consisting of "*." (with the obvious expansion) in the changelogs you post

Re: Simple enhancement to -dA dump

On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, Xinliang David Li wrote: > 2011-04-03 Xinliang David Li > > * final.c (dump_basic_block_info): New function. + fprintf (file, "# BLOCK %d", bb->index); Random spotting: please use ASM_COMMENT_START instead of the naked "#". brgds, H-P

Re: Add a mode argument to LEGITIMATE_CONSTANT_P, and make it a hook

On Mon, 4 Apr 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote: > Pretty much as the subject says. > OK to install? CRIS and MMIX parts are ok. brgds, H-P PS. FWIW anyone: for "my" targets, a CC to me usually gets a faster response.

[PATCH] libstdc++-v3: Fix signed-overflow warning for newlib/ctype_base.h, PR116895

FWIW, I see "typedef char mask;" also for bionic and openbsd. Tested for cris-elf. Ok to commit? -- >8 -- There are 100+ regressions when running the g++ testsuite for newlib targets (probably excepting ARM-based ones) e.g cris-elf after commit r15-3859-g63a598deb0c9fc "libstdc++: #ifdef out #pr

[committed] testsuite/gfortran.dg/unsigned_22.f90: Add missing close with delete, PR116701

Committed as pre-approved in the bugzilla PR. Heads-up: I intend to also submit for approval a patch that adds (the equivalent of) ! { dg-final { remote_file target delete "fort.10" } } to all running fortran test-cases that has an open-unit- statement (i.e. can create one of those "anonymous" f

Re: [PATCH] gfortran testsuite: Remove unit-files in files having open-statements, PR116701

Thanks for the review! > Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:10:27 -0700 > Cc: Jerry D > From: Jerry D > On 9/23/24 11:21 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > I hope the inclusion of gfortran-dg.exp in > > fortran-torture.exp is not controversial, but there's no > > fortra

[PATCH v2] gfortran testsuite: Remove unit-files in files having open-statements, PR116701

Changes since v1: - Rename gfortran-dg-rmunits to fortran-delete-unit-files. - Move it to lib/fortran-modules.exp. - Tweak commit message accordingly and mention cause of placement of the proc. - Tweak proc comment to mention why keeping removals unique despite comment. Here's a general approa

Re: RFC PATCH: contrib/test_summary mode for submitting testsuite results to bunsen

On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Hi, HP - > > > I'd love for (something like) gcc-testresults@ to be usefully > > searchable (it can be done but... lacks), so please allow me: > > Certainly! > > > > +: ${bunsengit=ssh://sourceware.org/git/bunsendb.git/}; > > > +: ${bunsentag=`who

[committed] testsuite/gfortran.dg/open_errors_2.f90: Remove now-redundant file deletion

Only because I wrote earlier that I'd do this patch. Committed as obvious. Sanity-checked by running the test in a native tree as "make check-gcc-fortran RUNTESTFLAGS=dg.exp=open_errors_2.f90" -- >8 -- Now that fort.N files are removed by the testsuite framework, remove this single "manual" file

<    13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   >