== This week ==
* GCC Modularization Project (9/10)
- Flattening header files
- gimple-streamer.h, tree-streamer.h, lto-streamer.h
- Additional updates based on review:
- Created new header files to contain prototypes from .c files
- Boostrapped changes
- New changes being reviewed
- tree-core.h, cfgloop.h, df.h
- Removed unnecessary includes
- Created new header files to contain exports from .c files
* Misc. (1/10)
- Conference calls
== Next week ==
- Continue flattening of header files on GCC modularization project
- Vacation November 12-14th
== Progress ==
* Zero/sign extension elimination with widening types (TCWG-546 - 9/10)
- benchmarked Spec2k and the improvements are very small
- Coremark fared worse. Looked into the cases and relaxed some of the
constraints.
- Subsequent passes are also not optimizing some of the expected cases
- Re-factored and posted an RFC patch for comments at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-11/msg00756.html
* Improve block memory operations by GCC (TCWG-142 - 1/10)
- Looked at the test-cases and gcc dumps
== Plan ==
* Continue with improve block memory operations by GCC.
* Continue with Zero/sign extension pass based on feedback.
== Progress ==
* GCC 4.8 and 4.9 releases (2/10)
- committed both branch merges after review+checked the validation results
- 4.8 needs another branch merge, to get the last errata-related backport
* GCC trunk/4.9 cross-validation (1/10)
- committed a couple of patches to clean the testsuite
- observed a couple of regressions, no time to investigate/report
* AArch64 sanitizer
- got agreement in principle for a new patch, which would test the
kernel headers version.
* Neon intrinsics tests update (1/10)
- the 2 PR I created last week are probably duplicate.
- ARM posted patches to fix problems in the same area, but don't fix these PRs
* cbuild2
- no progress
* Misc (6/10)
- calls, meetings, support
== Next ==
- Tuesday 11th public holiday
* AArch64 sanitizer
* Neon intrinsics update
* GCC linaro 4.8/4.9 releases
* cbuild2:
- analyze previous results
- look at backport-test and tcwgweb scripts+logs
== Progress ==
* Automation Framework (CARD-1378 4/8)
- Moving TCWG machines to the new office
- Setting up new rack, stacking boards, etc.
- Setting up Junos
* Buildbots (TCWG-76 2/8)
- Moving buildbots to the new office
- Checking libcxxabi failure, marking as XFAIL
- All bots green
* Background (2/8)
- Code review, meetings, discussions, etc.
* 1 day ill
== Plan ==
* Continue lab migration
Hi,
When updating:
>From git://git.linaro.org/toolchain/binutils-gdb
e0f5246..336649d master -> linaro/master
I now get the following build error:
gdb/binutils/readelf.c: In function ‘process_mips_specific’:
gdb/binutils/readelf.c:13522:3: error: format ‘%lu’ expects argument of type
‘long unsigned int’, but argument 2 has type ‘size_t’ [-Werror=format=]
printf (_("<symbol index %lu exceeds number of dynamic symbols>"), i);
^
Thanks,
Cov
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Hi,
after the recent lkml thread on blacklisting some GCC versions (see
below) and the issue in identifying accurately our releases, I propose
to add some Linaro specific macros in our branches (i.e this patch
will not go upstream) to be able to check the Linaro version at
preprocessor time. It will not solve the kernel issue with 4.8.N but
hopefully help if such issues happen again the the futur.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/119412
What GCC has for the moment is 3 macros __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__ and
__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ that are filled by parsing version number
contained in BASE-VER file, for instance on our 4.9 branch:
__GNUC__ = 4
__GNUC_MINOR__ = 9
__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ = 2
In our branches, the Linaro version number is in the LINARO-VERSION
file and has this format:
At release point : 4.9-2014.10
Head of our branch: 4.9-2014.10-1~dev
I want your (the team and users) point of view on the macros we need
to create from it. Here is the options I see:
A - Be fully Linaro consistent:
__LINARO_MAJOR__ = 4
__LINARO_MINOR__ = 9
__LINARO_YEAR__ = 2014
__LINARO_MONTH__ = 10
__LINARO_SPIN__ = 0 or N
__LINARO_STATE = 0 for release or 1 for dev
B - Only give information that are not in the __GNUC* macros:
__LINARO_YEAR__ = 2014
__LINARO_MONTH__ = 10
__LINARO_SPIN__ = 0 or N
__LINARO_STATE = 0 for release or 1 for dev
C - Be more concise:
__LINARO_VERSION__ = 201410
__LINARO_SPIN__ = 0 or N
__LINARO_STATE = 0 for release or 1 for dev
D - Even more:
__LINARO_VERSION__ = 201410N (with N the spin number)
__LINARO_STATE = 0 for release or 1 for dev
E - Hardcore conciseness:
__LINARO__ = 201410NM (N = SPIN M = state)
F - One of the previous ones without STATE information.
G - One of the previous ones without SPIN information.
Do you think it is something we need ?
Do we already have that kind of macros in some products (binutils,
gdb, glibc, ...) ?
What option do you prefer ?
My own feeling is that C+F is sufficient as STATE information is
useless for releases and I don't think dev builds checking have to be
used in another project. But SPIN information can be useful has we're
doing respin because an outstanding issue/improvement has to be
fixed/added to the current release, thus it is the kind of thing you
want to check if the version of the compiler you are using contains.
Thanks,
Yvan
Dear all concerned:
ARM has reported it's 53's bug:AArch64 multiply-accumulate instruction might produce incorrect result
and developed the patch descriped below. will the patch be backported to Linaro 4.9 this month's release.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2014-10/msg00335.html
thanks
Peter
cbuild2 benchmarking - TCWG-360 [8/10]
* Scripts build SPEC 2006 tools on x86_64 and arm, not yet on AArch64
* Scripts cross-build for x86 to arm and aarch64
* Cross-built binaries refuse to run
Meetings/mail/etc - [2/10]
=Plan=
cbuild2 benchmarking
* Make cross-built binaries run, collect reports
* Build tools for AArch64 (lower priority)
libm exerising
* Work through list of benchmarks, see what I find
= Progress ==
* TCWG-544 - Investigate core mark performance with both at -O3 with LTO +
PGO (6/10)
* Misc [3/10]
emails, linaro and AMD meetings and 1-1 with inline manger.
1-1 with christophe.
* Tried to reproduce Bug 63653 (1/10)
== Plan ==
* Continue core mark performance with both at -O3 with LTO + PGO.
* Continue Bugfix 63653
== Progress ==
GDB Tracepoints/Fast Tracepoints support on arm [TCWG-480] [3/10]
-- Investigate arm hardware debugging capabilities in linux kernel.
ARM/AArch64 GDB testsuite failures investigation [TCWG-507] [4/10]
Trying out patches that add support for gdbserver catch vfork/fork
[TCWG-507] [2/10]
Miscellaneous [1/10]
-- Meetings, Emails etc
-- Annual Review 2014
== Plan ==
Monday/Tuesday Public Holidays in Pakistan.
Fix watchpoints-reuse-slot tests for arm somehow to allow skipping
unsupported tests
Also investigate the same on AArch64. [TCWG-507]
Re-submit some hanging patches after a bit of rework to grab attention.
== This week ==
* GCC Modularization Project (7/10)
- Decided on work near term work objectives with Andrew Macleod
- Began flattening header files
- gimple-streamer.h (complete)
- tree-streamer.h (complete)
- lto-streamer.h (complete)
- tree-core.h (In progress)
- cfgloop.h (In Progress
- df.h (In progress)
* Vector Extensions Project (2/10)
- Design work on C++ classes
- Call with Charles Baylis to discuss libvpx benchmark
* Misc. (1/10)
- Conference calls
- ARM required online training
== Next week ==
- Continue flattening of header files on GCC modularization project
- Further review of libvpx and vector extensions design work
== Progress ==
* Zero/sign extension elimination with widening types (TCWG-546 - 10/10)
- Fixed regression failures
- Fixed bootstrapping issues for ARM and AArch64
- Re-factored and added some comments
- x86-64 Bootstrapped and regression tested for all languages with
forced promotion. There is 6 differences in scanning for certain
instructions. All the execution tests are passing. Needs further
investigation.
== Plan ==
* Continue with Zero/sign extension pass.
- Benchmarking
- Get patch ready for upstream discussion
* Improve block memory operations by GCC (TCWG-142)
- Start work on this
== Progress ==
* GCC trunk/4.9 cross-validation (1/10)
- submitted a couple of patches to clean testsuite cases
* Neon intrinsic tests (1/10)
- submitted patch to avoid running the tests on ARM targets w/o Neon
- started adding new tests
- created 2 PR about intrinsic tests failing on AArch64_be
(1 assigned to Venkat, 1 to me)
* AArch64 sanitizer (1/10)
- submitted a patch upstream to allow supporting both older and newer kernels
No feedback so far.
* GCC 4.8 and 4.9 releases (3/10)
- preparing both releases including ARM's latest fixes for the A53 erratum
- had to respin mid-week after new fix was committed
- LINK_SPEC patch not committed yet in 4.8, and committed in 4.9
after I made the branch merge.
- now checking results with references. Several FAIL appear. TBC.
* cbuild2 schroot and master branches comparison (1/10)
- re-ran schroot branch after cleaning spurious "-static" flag left
in dejagnu configuration
- better results, faster
* Misc (3/10)
- calls, meetings
== Next ==
* GCC 4.8 and 4.9 releases: hopefully, after branch merge review
* AArch64 sanitizer
* Neon intrinsics tests update
* cbuild2:
- analyze previous results
- look at backport-test and tcwgweb scripts + logs
== Progress ==
* US LLVM Dev Mtg (4/6)
* Buildbots (TCWG-76 1/6)
- Fixing last bugs of the libcxx bot
- One last failure being looked at
* Background (1/6)
- Code review, meetings, discussions, etc.
- Meeting with Google/ARM/Qualcomm about Android+LLVM
* Two days off
== Plan ==
* Investigate last libcxx bug
* Move lab/office
Thanks for the reply, Will Newton.
Then can we expect the fix to be included for the official Android
toolchain 2014.11?
And, thanks for explaining the culprit of this bug, Jongsung Kim! :)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:00 PM, <linaro-toolchain-request(a)lists.linaro.org>
wrote:
> Send linaro-toolchain mailing list submissions to
> linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> linaro-toolchain-request(a)lists.linaro.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> linaro-toolchain-owner(a)lists.linaro.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of linaro-toolchain digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. RE: Enabling back linker plugin for Linaro Android toolchain
> (Jongsung Kim)
> 2. Re: Enabling back linker plugin for Linaro Android toolchain
> (Will Newton)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:26:30 +0900
> From: "Jongsung Kim" <neidhard.kim(a)lge.com>
> To: '???' <qkrwngud825(a)gmail.com>, <linaro-android(a)lists.linaro.org>,
> <linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org>
> Subject: RE: Enabling back linker plugin for Linaro Android toolchain
> Message-ID: <012f01cff31f$c01cea90$4056bfb0$(a)lge.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> The version-string from binutils-linaro looks to be blamed. It once was:
>
> GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.7-2013.04-20130415 - Linaro GCC
> 2013.04) 2.23.1
>
> and the linker plugin works with this version of Linaro prebuilt
> toolchain. Now it is:
>
> GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.8-2014.04 - Linaro GCC 4.8-2014.04)
> 2.24.0.20140311 Linaro 2014.03
> GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.9-2014.08 - Linaro GCC 4.9-2014.08)
> 2.24.0.20140801 Linaro 2014.08
>
> and the linker plugin is not supported:
>
> $ arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -o hello hello.c
> arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc: error: -fuse-linker-plugin is not supported in
> this configuration
>
> Look into gcc/configure script. It uses the version of ld to determine
> whether ld supports linker plugin. It extracts the version by doing
> something like:
>
> $ arm-linux-gnueabihf-ld --version | sed 1q | sed -n -e 's,^.*[
> ]\([0-9][0-9]*\.[0-9][0-9]*.*\)$,\1,p'
>
> and it will extract the last 2014.03 or 2014.08. By using proper
> substitution expression like 's,^GNU ld (.*) \([0-9][.0-9]*\).*$,\1,p', the
> script may enable linker plugin.
>
> However, patching the script looks like a bad idea, because it doesn?t
> help handling the version of gold:
>
> GNU gold (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu 2.24) 1.11
> GNU gold (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.7-2013.04-20130415 - Linaro GCC
> 2013.04 2.23.1) 1.11
> GNU gold (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.8-2014.04 - Linaro GCC 4.8-2014.04
> 2.24.0.20140311 Linaro 2014.03) 1.11
> GNU gold (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.9-2014.08 - Linaro GCC 4.9-2014.08
> 2.24.0.20140801 Linaro 2014.08) 1.11
>
> I couldn?t find a reasonable general expression to extract the version.
>
>
> From: linaro-toolchain-bounces(a)lists.linaro.org [mailto:
> linaro-toolchain-bounces(a)lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ???
> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 10:15 PM
> To: linaro-android(a)lists.linaro.org; linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org
> Subject: Enabling back linker plugin for Linaro Android toolchain
>
> I'm using Linaro Android toolchain's arm-eabi- for compiling my Android
> Linux kernel with LTO.
>
> The main benefits of my kernel is that it uses
> LTO(Link-Time-Optimizations).
> (Patches found here: https://github.com/andikleen/linux-misc)
>
> But now, it's broken with Linaro Android toolchains from 2014.09~
>
> Building Linux kernel with LTO requires Linker plugin with the toolchain.
>
>
> But for some reason, linker plugin is disabled with 2014.09 and 2014.10
> (Which I used from here :
> https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/toolchain-4.9-2014.…
> https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/toolchain-4.9-2014.…
> )
>
> LTO build works flawlessly with 2014.08.
>
> With 2014.09 and 2014.10, I get the following error :
> cc1: error: -fno-fat-lto-objects are supported only with linker plugin
>
> If I explicitly remove " -fno-fat-lto-objects " from the Makefile, the
> linker fails to link all of the object files.
>
>
> I would like to ask Linaro to enable back the Linker plugin support :)
>
> Thanks in advance..
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 09:12:53 +0000
> From: Will Newton <will.newton(a)linaro.org>
> To: Jongsung Kim <neidhard.kim(a)lge.com>
> Cc: ??? <qkrwngud825(a)gmail.com>, linaro-android(a)lists.linaro.org,
> Linaro Toolchain <linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org>
> Subject: Re: Enabling back linker plugin for Linaro Android toolchain
> Message-ID:
> <CANu=DmhPdCGYw0=hCs9tmkbCU6hMLLMJnYS-u_JGz=
> p17Bgonw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On 29 October 2014 02:26, Jongsung Kim <neidhard.kim(a)lge.com> wrote:
> > The version-string from binutils-linaro looks to be blamed. It once was:
> >
> > GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.7-2013.04-20130415 - Linaro GCC
> 2013.04) 2.23.1
> >
> > and the linker plugin works with this version of Linaro prebuilt
> toolchain. Now it is:
> >
> > GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.8-2014.04 - Linaro GCC 4.8-2014.04)
> 2.24.0.20140311 Linaro 2014.03
> > GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.9-2014.08 - Linaro GCC 4.9-2014.08)
> 2.24.0.20140801 Linaro 2014.08
> >
> > and the linker plugin is not supported:
> >
> > $ arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -o hello hello.c
> > arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc: error: -fuse-linker-plugin is not supported in
> this configuration
> >
> > Look into gcc/configure script. It uses the version of ld to determine
> whether ld supports linker plugin. It extracts the version by doing
> something like:
> >
> > $ arm-linux-gnueabihf-ld --version | sed 1q | sed -n -e 's,^.*[
> ]\([0-9][0-9]*\.[0-9][0-9]*.*\)$,\1,p'
> >
> > and it will extract the last 2014.03 or 2014.08. By using proper
> substitution expression like 's,^GNU ld (.*) \([0-9][.0-9]*\).*$,\1,p', the
> script may enable linker plugin.
> >
> > However, patching the script looks like a bad idea, because it doesn?t
> help handling the version of gold:
> >
> > GNU gold (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu 2.24) 1.11
> > GNU gold (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.7-2013.04-20130415 - Linaro GCC
> 2013.04 2.23.1) 1.11
> > GNU gold (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.8-2014.04 - Linaro GCC
> 4.8-2014.04 2.24.0.20140311 Linaro 2014.03) 1.11
> > GNU gold (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-4.9-2014.08 - Linaro GCC
> 4.9-2014.08 2.24.0.20140801 Linaro 2014.08) 1.11
> >
> > I couldn?t find a reasonable general expression to extract the version.
>
> This should be fixed in binutils-linaro-2.24-2014.11.
>
> > From: linaro-toolchain-bounces(a)lists.linaro.org [mailto:
> linaro-toolchain-bounces(a)lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ???
> > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 10:15 PM
> > To: linaro-android(a)lists.linaro.org; linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org
> > Subject: Enabling back linker plugin for Linaro Android toolchain
> >
> > I'm using Linaro Android toolchain's arm-eabi- for compiling my Android
> Linux kernel with LTO.
> >
> > The main benefits of my kernel is that it uses
> LTO(Link-Time-Optimizations).
> > (Patches found here: https://github.com/andikleen/linux-misc)
> >
> > But now, it's broken with Linaro Android toolchains from 2014.09~
> >
> > Building Linux kernel with LTO requires Linker plugin with the toolchain.
> >
> >
> > But for some reason, linker plugin is disabled with 2014.09 and 2014.10
> > (Which I used from here :
> https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/toolchain-4.9-2014.…
> https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/toolchain-4.9-2014.…
> )
> >
> > LTO build works flawlessly with 2014.08.
> >
> > With 2014.09 and 2014.10, I get the following error :
> > cc1: error: -fno-fat-lto-objects are supported only with linker plugin
> >
> > If I explicitly remove " -fno-fat-lto-objects " from the Makefile, the
> linker fails to link all of the object files.
> >
> >
> > I would like to ask Linaro to enable back the Linker plugin support :)
> >
> > Thanks in advance..
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linaro-toolchain mailing list
> > linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org
> > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
>
>
>
> --
> Will Newton
> Toolchain Working Group, Linaro
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> linaro-toolchain mailing list
> linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
>
>
> End of linaro-toolchain Digest, Vol 52, Issue 16
> ************************************************
>
I'm using Linaro Android toolchain's arm-eabi- for compiling my Android
Linux kernel with LTO.
The main benefits of my kernel is that it uses LTO(Link-Time-Optimizations).
(Patches found here: https://github.com/andikleen/linux-misc)
But now, it's broken with Linaro Android toolchains from 2014.09~
Building Linux kernel with LTO requires Linker plugin with the toolchain.
But for some reason, linker plugin is disabled with 2014.09 and 2014.10
(Which I used from here :
https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/toolchain-4.9-2014.…https://android-build.linaro.org/builds/~linaro-android/toolchain-4.9-2014.…
)
LTO build works flawlessly with 2014.08.
With 2014.09 and 2014.10, I get the following error :
cc1: error: -fno-fat-lto-objects are supported only with linker plugin
If I explicitly remove " -fno-fat-lto-objects " from the Makefile, the
linker fails to link all of the object files.
I would like to ask Linaro to enable back the Linker plugin support :)
Thanks in advance..
Hi All,
There will be lab downtime in the month of November, and rather than
jeopardize the November quarterly binary toolchain release we've decided to
take some steps to ensure that it takes place on time.
The November binary toolchain quarterly release will contain some ARM64
erratum fixes. These are already in the Linaro GCC 4.9 2014.10 source
package release.
The November binary toolchain quarterly release will contain these fixes,
and will be delivered as planned, but will be based on the Linaro GCC 4.9
2014.10 package. We will not have a November Linaro GCC 4.9 2014.11 source
package release.
The December release will be the next Linaro GCC 4.9 source package release.
--
Ryan S. Arnold
Linaro Toolchain Working Group - Engineering Manager
www.linaro.org
cbuild2 benchmarking - TCWG-360 [2/10]
* Figured out how to cook my own OE images
* Started remembering how to build spec
libm exercising - CARD-1693 [2/10]
* Borrowed a usable Juno
* Found that lapack tests segfault on AArch64
* Ran linpack hpl, didn't observe it exercising libm much
** Haven't ruled out Bernie-error yet, though
Upstream - CARD-341 [1/10]
* Respun lowlevellock.h comments
Meetings/mail/etc [5/10]
* A lot of time (>3/10) in performance review and other annual ARM admin
* Some back and forth about difficulties of userspace access to ID registers
=Plan=
Get spec2006 working via my scripts
Find a good HPL libm exerciser
Spend a lot less time on ARM admin
== Progress ==
Further progress on GDB Tracepoints/Fast Tracepoints support on arm
[TCWG-480] [6/10]
-- Debugging and trying out some code enabling tracepoints in gdbserver
-- Research on past tracepoint patches and x86 vs arm architecture comparison
ARM/AArch64 GDB testsuite failures investigation [2/10]
Miscellaneous [2/10]
-- Meetings, Emails etc
-- Fix SSH configurations
-- Patch Scrolling
-- Hong Kong visa process
-- Multiple Dr visits due to continued sickness
== Plan ==
Further progress on GDB Tracepoints/Fast Tracepoints support on arm [TCWG-480]
Fix internet latency issues from lab hardware.
= Progress ==
* Short week was in vacation (22-24 October)
* Updated perf profile numbers for instruction count and documented my
analysis for Linaro compiler's O3 + LTO comparison on Aarch64 vs X86_64
(TCWG-544) (2/10)
* Misc [2/10]
emails, AMD meetings and 1-1 with inline manger.
1-1 with christophe.
== Plan ==
* Coremark benchmark and profiling.
Investigate trunk degradation for O3+ PGO + LTO and report.
== Progress ==
* Zero/sign extension elimination with widening types (TCWG-546 - 10/10)
- Re-wrote the pass from the results of experiments so far
- Fixed most of the regression failures
- 5 tests are still failing from C/C++/Fortran regression suite.
== Plan ==
* Continue with Zero/sign extension pass.
- Get bootstrapping for ARM and AArch64 working
- Fix remaining regression failures
- Add detail dumps
- Remove unnecessary copies (it is now being removed dead code
elimination pass)
- Get patch ready for upstream discussion
== This week ==
* GCC Modularization Project (5/10)
- Reviewed Re-Architecture GNU Cauldron videos by Andrew Macleod
- Reviewed tree/gimple source base
* Linaro bugzilla 602 - gcc 4.7.3 compiler internal error while building
hsail components (2/10)
- Resolved bug by determining that 4.7 compiler was assinging a
incorrect VFP register to a parameter
- Issue was fixed in 4.8 by adding call to arm_hard_regno_ok which
disallowed register
* vector Extensions Project (2/10)
- Preliminary design work on C++ classes and libvpx review
* Misc. (1/10)
- Conducted interview with Prathamesh Kulkarni
- Conference calls
== Next week ==
- GCC Modularization draft plan to TCWG group for review
- Understand status of Re-Architecture work by Andrew Macleod
- Further review of libvpx and vector extensions design work
=== Progress ===
SPEC Benchmarking [5/10]
. managed to run SPEC2k
. managed to run integer parts of SPEC2k6
. spec2xxx-report fails
. can't run full suite as LAVA Junos have insufficient disk
NEON error reporting bugs #403/#418 [3/10]
. ongoing mailing list discussions
vldN_lane patches [1/10]
. respun and committed
Misc [1/10]
=== Plan ===
Talk to Tejas @ ARM about AArch64 NEON loads/stores
Review prep
Move office
Day off at some point (likely Wednesday)
Short week, 2 days off
== Progress ==
* GCC trunk/4.9 cross-validation (2/10)
- committed testsuite patch to support forcing -mword-relocations
option when compiling testglue.c
* Neon intrinsics tests (2/10)
- committed the 1st batch (21 commits)
* AArch64 sanitizer
- libsanitizer internal data depend on the kernel headers version
used to build the toolchain, old_[gu]id_t type changed in 3.15.3.
- discussing the best way to address this
* Misc (2/10)
- calls, meetings
== Next ==
* 4.8 branch merge for next release
* GCC trunk/4.9 cross-validation
- investigate abi_check test, probably another testsuite harness
configuration issue
* AArch64 sanitizer
* Neon intrinsics tests update
* cbuild2:
- analyze previous results
- look at backport-test script + logs