On Mon, 19 Jun 2023, Tamar Christina wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> > > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 11:19 AM > > To: Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Remove -save-temps from tests using -flto > > > > On Mon, 19 Jun 2023, Tamar Christina wrote: > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 7:28 AM > > > > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > > > > Cc: Tamar Christina <tamar.christ...@arm.com> > > > > Subject: [PATCH] Remove -save-temps from tests using -flto > > > > > > > > The following removes -save-temps that doesn't seem to have any good > > > > reason from tests that also run with -flto added. That can cause > > > > ltrans files to race with other multilibs tested and I'm frequently > > > > seeing linker complaints that the architecture doesn't match here. > > > > > > > > I'm not sure whether the .ltrans.o files end up in a non gccN/ > > > > specific directory or if we end up sharing the same dir for > > > > different multilibs (not sure if it's easily possible to avoid that). > > > > > > > > Parallel testing on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu in progress. > > > > > > > > Tamar, was there any reason to use -save-temps here? > > > > > > At the time I was getting unresolved errors from these without it. > > > But perhaps that's something to do with dejagnu versions? > > > > I don't know. Can you check if there's an issue on your side when removing > > - > > save-temps? > > Nope no issues, all tests still pass.
Pushed then. Richard.
