Hi,
I'm investigating a GCC testsuite FAIL of PowerPC with e500 multilib.
The test is pr42245.c, which sets options to "-O2 -fselective-scheduling
-fsel-sched-pipelining".
$ ./cc1 -quiet pr42245.c -mcpu=8540 -mfloat-gprs=single -O2
-fselective-scheduling
pr42245.c: In function ‘build_DIS_CO
On Sun, 17 Oct 2010 22:34:47 +0100
Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 17 October 2010 22:16, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> >
> > So I will ask face to face practical advices on these issues, in
> > particular I need to understand who is able to give me constructive &
> > "definitive" advices (apparently
> Well,then I am not quite sure about the usage of this testsuite.Most
> testsuites seem to be used to test whether or not a kind of
> optimization works,and according to your view,this testsuite seems to
> be useless.
The testcase only, not the testsuite.
> So do you think it is proper if we
2010/10/18 Mark Mitchell :
> The GCC SC has appointed you as a reviewer for the gengtype/GTY
> machinery in GCC. You now have the authority to review and approve
> patches to the gengtype programs, to use of GTY markers, and other
> related topics.
Thanks!
> Please update MAINTAINERS to reflect
Well,then I am not quite sure about the usage of this testsuite.Most
testsuites seem to be used to test whether or not a kind of
optimization works,and according to your view,this testsuite seems to
be useless.
So do you think it is proper if we remove this testsuite from the
GCC testsuites?
Hi all,
When compiling a C code containing a global declaration like:
char *s = "abc";
The assembly code will be
.section .rodata
.LC0:
.ascii "abc\0"
.section .data
.align 1
_s:
.long .LC0
where the real address of string constant is kept in _s. However,
Laurynas --
The GCC SC has appointed you as a reviewer for the gengtype/GTY
machinery in GCC. You now have the authority to review and approve
patches to the gengtype programs, to use of GTY markers, and other
related topics.
Please update MAINTAINERS to reflect your appointment.
Thank you,
--
On Sun, 17 Oct 2010, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> So I will ask face to face practical advices on these issues, in
>>> particular I need to understand who is able to give me constructive &
>>> "definitive" advices (apparently I asked on licens...@fsf.org and Karl
>>> Berry replied, but probably his o
On 17 October 2010 22:34, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 17 October 2010 22:16, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
>>
>> So I will ask face to face practical advices on these issues, in
>> particular I need to understand who is able to give me constructive &
>> "definitive" advices (apparently I asked on lic
On 17 October 2010 22:16, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
>
> So I will ask face to face practical advices on these issues, in
> particular I need to understand who is able to give me constructive &
> "definitive" advices (apparently I asked on licens...@fsf.org and Karl
> Berry replied, but probably h
Hello All,
I will attend the GCC Summit (unless some strikes in France will cancel
all flights to Canada; I hope not, but I don't know...) and I am busy
preparing my GCC MELT tutorial slides. [See
http://gcc-melt.org/leaflet.html for more]
There are a few questions I will definitely ask to the S
Hello All,
I apparently have a makefile bug (the bug is mine, not of make!) in
the GCC MELT branch, only when using it for plugin.
In case you want to help me, here are the gory details
First, read http://gcc-melt.org/ & http://gcc-melt.org/leaflet.html &
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/MELT for the co
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20101017 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20101017/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On 17/10/2010 19:21, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> On 16/10/2010 21:20, Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> LTO symtab entries to be transformed by ASM_OUTPUT_LABELREF, are they
>> intended to be assembler-level symbols, or are they supposed to be
>> C-level symbols?
>
> Hmm, yes, whatever mangling happens in real sy
> On 16/10/2010 21:20, Dave Korn wrote:
>
> >> U _libintl_bindtextdomain
> >> U _libintl_gettext
> >> U _libintl_textdomain
>
> >> 0070 9600 5f6c 6962696e 746c5f74 .._libintl_t
> >> 0080 65787464 6f6d6169 6e02 extdomain...
> >> 0090 000
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Dave Korn wrote on Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 01:42:15PM CEST:
>> I can't find any mention of it at the usual place for external sources
>> (http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#upstream), so is our version
>> forked, or is that just an oversight?
> I
16 matches
Mail list logo
