similar to: GCC 5 and -Wstrict-aliasing in JSON.h

在 2018-08-10 06:20, Kim Gräsman 写道: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:02 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc at gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> If GCC 4.9.3 thinks there's an aliasing violation it might >> misoptimise. It doesn't matter if it's right or not, it matters if it >> treats the code as undefined or not. >> >> And apparently GCC does think

Hi all, I met this error(title) when i was trying to compile llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7 on loongson2f,a mips compatible platform.I also failed to build a cross-compiler and the error message was the same . Is that means llvm-gcc cannot support mips back-end now? Thanks. Here is my configure options: $export TARGET=mips64el-unknown-linux-gnu $../../src/llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7.source/configure

Hi HotSpot and LLVM developers, I am building OpenJDK8[1] with LLVM toolchain[2] for mips64el, it failed to build: /home/loongson/jdk8-mips/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp:52:35: error: ordered comparison between pointer and zero ('address' (aka 'unsigned char *') and 'int') if (Universe::narrow_oop_base() > 0) { // Implies UseCompressedOops.

Hi all, Thanks for Aleksandar Beserminji great job: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50437 It is not easy to reproduce the LLVMBUG-38221[1] by building OpenJDK8, it needs some workaround https://raw.githubusercontent.com/xiangzhai/jdk8u-dev/master/Workaround-compile-with-llvm.patch LLVM toolchain[2] is just able to compile OpenJDK8 for mips64el now: http://hg.loongnix.org/ 1.

Hi Thomas, Thanks for your kind response! Please review my backport for hs25, thanks a lot! diff -r 3544d85cfe11 src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp --- a/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp Thu Jul 19 10:00:36 2018 +0100 +++ b/src/share/vm/opto/lcm.cpp Fri Jul 20 10:06:37 2018 +0800 @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ // Check whether val is not-null-decoded compressed oop, // i.e. will grab into the base of the heap

hello all, I am trying to compile the R in Win7 and compiles one small part but the script don't move from the 'base' directory to 'stats' I installed the Rtools likee administrator and call the terminal (MS-DOS) like administrator too. if somebody can tell me any tips, I thank in advanced cleber ############################################# File LOG

Hi Thomas, Looks good. Your changes in loopPredicate.cpp does not match original changes - they miss iff->is_RangeCheck() check [1]. But in JDK8 we did not have specialized RangeCheckNode class in C2. Suggested fix should be fine fro jdk 8u. Reviewed. Please, when sending RFA ( approval request) use original 8174050 bug id. Thanks, Vladimir [1]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 at 22:59, Kim Gräsman <kim.grasman at gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks all for pitching in to help! > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:25 PM, Sam McCall <sam.mccall at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Obviously if there really is something illegal here we should fix it in > > LLVM, but it looks like this warning is a false positive (anyone disagree?)

Hi LLVM developers, GCC[1] is able to use Loongson ISA[2] for instruction selection: $ cat hello.c #include <stdio.h> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { printf("Hello World\n"); return 0; } $ gcc -O0 -S hello.c $ cat hello.s .file 1 "hello.c" .section .mdebug.abi64 .previous .nan legacy .gnu_attribute 4, 1 .abicalls

- my old email address. The ISA_* classes might not be the best choice for this. There's an overall hierarchy and ordering to the ISA_* classes since they represent the generations of the MIPS ISA. If these extensions are available in Loongson chips based on MIPS32r1 and MIPS32r2 for example, it becomes difficult to describe with ISA_* classes without duplicating instruction definitions or

Author of the problematic code here. Thanks everyone, and sorry to have caused difficulty! Obviously if there really is something illegal here we should fix it in LLVM, but it looks like this warning is a false positive (anyone disagree?) Still if there's a simple source-level workaround, or we can suppress the warning with a #pragma, I'd be happy to do that. GCC 4.9.3 is a supported

On 08/12/2018 02:19 PM, Kim Gräsman wrote: > I still feel a little uncomfortable, because I think Jonathan makes an > excellent point -- if GCC thinks there's a strict-aliasing violation > (whether the standard agrees or not) and classifies this as undefined > behavior, we might invoke the optimizers wrath. The warning is a nice > hint that this could happen. Indeed. And

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 at 03:09, Leslie Zhai wrote: > Could you test to compile LLVM with GCC old versions 4/5/6? Does it need > to backport your patch to GCC old version? GCC versions before 6.4 are not supported, so no backports will happen to 4.x or 5 releases and I doubt anybody's going to routinely test anything with them. If there's a bug in GCC 4.9.3 that you can't work

On Dec 20, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Mike Stump wrote: > They looked real enough to me: Fixed, thanks. -Chris > > > /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/Target/CellSPU/SPUISelDAGToDAG.cpp: In > function ‘bool<unnamed>::isFPS16Immediate(llvm::ConstantFPSDNode*, > short int&)’: > /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/Target/CellSPU/SPUISelDAGToDAG.cpp: > 148: warning:

json::Value in JSON.h is a discriminated union. The storage is a char array of appropriate type and alignment. The storage holds one object at a time, it's initialized (and for nontrivial types, destroyed) at the right times to ensure this. The cast is only to the type of object that's already there, there's no magic here. On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 17:52 Andrew Haley <aph at

They looked real enough to me: /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/Target/CellSPU/SPUISelDAGToDAG.cpp: In function ‘bool<unnamed>::isFPS16Immediate(llvm::ConstantFPSDNode*, short int&)’: /Volumes/mrs5/net/llvm/llvm/lib/Target/CellSPU/SPUISelDAGToDAG.cpp: 148: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict- aliasing rules

When compiling trunk using gcc 4.1.2 on linux/ppc64, I now see a warning that I don't remember seeing previously: llvm[2]: Compiling InlineSpiller.cpp for Release+Asserts build /src/llvm-trunk-dev/include/llvm/ADT/PointerIntPair.h: In member function ‘const PointerTy* llvm::PointerIntPair<PointerTy, IntBits, IntType, PtrTraits>::getAddrOfPointer() const [with PointerTy = void*, unsigned

[root@iw-asterisk zaptel-1.2.1]# make gcc -I/lib/modules/2.4.21-4.ELsmp/build/include -O6 -DMODULE -D__KERNEL__ -DEXPORT_SYMTAB -I/lib/modules/2.4.21-4.ELsmp/build/drivers/net -Wall -I. -Wstrict-prototypes -fomit-frame-pointer -I/lib/modules/2.4.21-4.ELsmp/build/drivers/net/wan -I/lib/modules/2.4.21-4.ELsmp/build/include/net -DMODVERSIONS -include

On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 at 11:56, Kim Gräsman <kim.grasman at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 11:51 AM Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 08/12/2018 02:19 PM, Kim Gräsman wrote: > > > I still feel a little uncomfortable, because I think Jonathan makes an > > > excellent point -- if GCC thinks there's a strict-aliasing

I did some more extensive testing and found that all GCCs older than 7 trigger the warning, but only if CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release (which I guess indicates optimizations are enabled). There's a patch up for disabling the warning here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50607. I still feel a little uncomfortable, because I think Jonathan makes an excellent point -- if GCC thinks there's a