On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On May 15, 2017 6:56:53 PM GMT+02:00, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>>On Sat, 2017-05-13 at 08:18 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On May 12, 2017 10:42:34 PM GMT+02:00, Steve Ellcey >> om> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > (Short version of this email, is there a
Hi folks.
I've been having troubles comparing the results of different test runs
for quite some time, and have finally decided to whine about it.
Perhaps someone can point out to whatever I may be doing wrong.
I generally do "make check -k -j60" on two different trees and compare
the results
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> I've been having troubles comparing the results of different test runs for
> quite some time, and have finally decided to whine about it. Perhaps someone
> can point out to whatever I may be doing wrong.
>
> I generally do "ma
On 17 May 2017 at 11:23, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Has anyone seen this behavior? Is it my test box? Are there known problems
> with parallel checks?
Smells like https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
On 05/17/2017 07:28 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 17 May 2017 at 11:23, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>> Has anyone seen this behavior? Is it my test box? Are there known problems
>> with parallel checks?
>
> Smells like https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77684
>
Yup. Note that I ack'd a p
On 05/17/2017 04:23 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> I've been having troubles comparing the results of different test runs
> for quite some time, and have finally decided to whine about it. Perhaps
> someone can point out to whatever I may be doing wrong.
>
> I generally do "make check
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 09:13:40AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/17/2017 04:23 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > Hi folks.
> >
> > I've been having troubles comparing the results of different test runs
> > for quite some time, and have finally decided to whine about it. Perhaps
> > someone can point
On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 10:41 +0100, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> I happen to be working on loop distribution now (If guess correctly,
> to get hmmer fixed). So far my idea is to fuse the finest
> distributed
> loop in two passes, in the first pass, we merge all SCCs due to
> "true"
> data dependence; in the
As I started looking into this, it seems like PLUGIN_FINISH is where
my plugin will go. Everything is great so far. However, when plugins
at that event are invoked, they get no data. That means I will have to
look into global structures for information regarding the compilation.
Are there pointers
On 05/17/2017 10:36 AM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> As I started looking into this, it seems like PLUGIN_FINISH is where
> my plugin will go. Everything is great so far. However, when plugins
> at that event are invoked, they get no data. That means I will have to
> look into global structures for inform
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/17/2017 10:36 AM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>> As I started looking into this, it seems like PLUGIN_FINISH is where
>> my plugin will go. Everything is great so far. However, when plugins
>> at that event are invoked, they get no data. That means
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 05/17/2017 10:36 AM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>>> As I started looking into this, it seems like PLUGIN_FINISH is where
>>> my plugin will go. Everything is great so far. However, when plugins
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 05/17/2017 10:36 AM, Will Hawkins wrote:
As I started looking into this, it seems like PLUGIN_FINISH is where
my plugin
Snapshot gcc-6-20170517 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20170517/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 05/17/2017 10:36 AM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> As I started looking in
Marek Polacek writes:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 09:13:40AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 05/17/2017 04:23 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>> > Hi folks.
>> >
>> > I've been having troubles comparing the results of different test runs
>> > for quite some time, and have finally decided to whine about it.
16 matches
Mail list logo
