Division by zero

Hi, Division by zero is undefined. We chose to keep it: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-06/msg01068.html But now gcc seems to optimize it away. For the following function: $ cat t.c #include void foo (int rc) { int x = rc / INT_MAX; x = 4 / x; } $ gcc -O2 -S t.c $ cat t.s .fi

Re: Division by zero

On 2/10/07, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > "Jie Zhang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> But now gcc seems to optimize it away. For the following function: >> >> $ cat t.c >> #include >> void f

Re: Division by zero

On 2/10/07, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: > The code I posted in my first email is from libgloss/libnosys/_exit.c. > It's used to cause an exception deliberately. From your replies, it > seems it should find another way to do that. Any code th

Re: Division by zero

On 2/10/07, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 2/10/07, Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The code I posted in my first email is from libgloss/libnosys/_exit.c. > It's used to cause an exception deliberately. From your replies, it > seems it should f

Re: Division by zero

On 2/11/07, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm going to use an asm (). Yeah, an asm volatile ("" : : "r" (x) : ) should please GCC and still be portable to different platforms. I thought using an asm () for each port to cause an exception specific for that port. Such that divide-b

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

Hi, Any news about this? Regards, Jie On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > >> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Jie Zhang wrote: >> > I agree. I think Joseph is the best candidate for the maintainer of the >> >

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

Sorry, I just noticed that Joseph has been listed as the maintainer of option handling. Jie On 02/21/2011 11:56 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: Hi, Any news about this? Regards, Jie On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Wed, 12 Jan

Re: __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__ or does it?

On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Christopher Huang-Leaver wrote: > Output: > > small end first > big end first > > gcc -v > gcc version 4.4.5 (Gentoo 4.4.5 p1.2, pie-0.4.5) > I got the same result with g++-4.4 (4.4.6), g++-4.5 (4.5.3) on Debian testing. But with g++-4.6, I got small end first on

Re: __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_LITTLE_ENDIAN__ or does it?

On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 6 August 2011 22:40, Christopher Huang-Leaver wrote: >> Hello, >> >> This isn't really a compiler bug, but it's something which the manual >> doesn't describe too well so I thought I would point this out. >> >> This page of the manual: >>

Re: Ping: viewvc: python: RuntimeError: maximum recursion limit exceeded

On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >> Hi, I'm getting the following error in viewvc for several days now: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/dse.c?view=markup >> >> An Exception Has Occurred >> Python Traceback >> >> RuntimeError: maximum recursion limit exceeded >> I

Re: Stuck master branch in git mirror

Andreas Schwab wrote: It looks like the master branch of git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc hasn't been updated since 3 weeks (trunk is still ok). Same here. I now use trunk instead. Jie

Re: Truncated history in viewvc

Dave Korn wrote: Andrew Pinski wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Dave Korn wrote: Good morning all! Is there some reason that I don't know about (e.g. limiting the load on the server) why the revision log views of files in our viewvc setup would be heavily truncated? The issue com

Re: No .got section in ELF

On 11/26/2009 02:04 PM, yunfeng zhang wrote: The result is the same #include extern int g __attribute__((visibility("hidden"))); int g; int foo(int a, int b) { g = a + b; printf("%x, %x",&g, foo); return g; } load and call `foo' in the library, an outputting (with v

Re: GMP and GCC 4.3.2

On 12/18/2009 06:27 AM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote: Actually, I just finished updating my 4.3.2 to 4.3.3 and tested it and I still have the same issue. This seems to be a problem more than "just" 4.3.2. Here is the test program: #include #include int main() { mpz_t a,b; mpz_init_se

Question on PR36873

Hi, We just got a similar problem on Blackfin GCC recently. Let me take the test code from the bug as an example: typedef unsigned short u16; typedef unsigned int u32; u32 a(volatile u16* off) { return *off; } u32 b(u16* off) { return *off; } compiled with mingw32-gcc-4.3.0.

Re: Question on PR36873

On 12/23/2009 02:43 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: Hi, We just got a similar problem on Blackfin GCC recently. Let me take the test code from the bug as an example: I reduce the test case to a simpler one: $ cat foo.c unsigned int foo (volatile unsigned short *p) { return *p; } I the tree dump

Re: Question on PR36873

On 12/23/2009 06:12 PM, Dave Korn wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: typedef unsigned short u16; typedef unsigned int u32; u32 a(volatile u16* off) { return *off; } mingw32-gcc-4.3.0.exe -c -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -mtune=core2 test.c it produces: <_a>: 0: 8b 44

Re: MPC required in one week.

On 12/27/2009 03:05 PM, Silvius Rus wrote: On the flip side, it's not necessarily easy to get it to work. On my build system, apt-get doesn't find it. Downloading and installing the .deb manually triggers 3 missing deps. apt-get install libmpc-dev libmpc-dev is already in squeeze and sid if

Re: MPC required in one week.

On 12/01/2009 06:25 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: On 11/30/2009 09:47 PM, Michael Witten wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote: The patch which makes the MPC library a hard requirement for GCC bootstrapping has been approved today. Out of curiosity and ignorance: Why, speci

Re: Problem while configuring gcc3.2

Hi, Please don't top reply. On 12/28/2009 12:59 PM, Pardis Beikzadeh wrote: Hi, Also 'make bootstrap' doesn't work without running configure, so I'm not sure what the "recommended way" mentioned in the email below means. The bootstrap in Jim's reply means, I think, building a minimal (only C

Re: where can find source snapshots of first GCC 4.5.0 ?

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Bernd Roesch wrote: > Hi, > > Because of this regression, > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41311 > > Problem is in m68k-elf too, but happen not with any older GCC as 4.5.0 > > i want try out if the first GCC 4.5.0 snapshot > have this Problem or not.

Re: df_changeable_flags use in combine.c

On 01/05/2010 07:12 AM, Matt wrote: Hi, I'm fixing some compiler errors when configuring with --enable-build-with-cxx, and ran into a curious line of code that may indicate a bug: static unsigned int rest_of_handle_combine (void) { int rebuild_jump_labels_after_combine; df_set_flags (DF_LR_RUN

Re: Jie Zhang appointed bfin maintainer

On 02/08/2010 08:53 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: It is my pleasure to announce that, also based on the recommendation of Bernd as an existing maintainer, the steering committee has appointed Jie Zhang maintainer of the bfin port. Thanks for your contributions over the last five(?) years, Jie

No integral promotions when calling library function?

We are trying to add a 16bit integer division library function for bfin port. I just found GCC didn't do integral promotions when calling library function. For example, in function foo, I can assume both arguments are zero extended from unsigned short to unsigned int. extern unsigned short foo (u

Re: No integral promotions when calling library function?

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Dave Korn wrote: > On 18/02/2010 07:17, Jie Zhang wrote: >> We are trying to add a 16bit integer division library function for >> bfin port. I just found GCC didn't do integral promotions when calling >> library function. > >&

IRA conflict graph, multiple alternatives and commutative operands

8.) Now the problem is when and how to choose the alternative for register allocator to calculate the conflict graph? Yes, I have read the thread: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-02/msg00215.html This question seems not easy. So is there any practical method to make register allocator pick u

Question about removing multiple elements from VEC

o VEC function which can use a bitmap to do a ordered multiple remove. Did I miss something or I have to write one? Regards, -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery (650) 331-3385 x735

Re: Question about removing multiple elements from VEC

On 03/17/2010 12:08 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: Hi, I'm looking at this FIXME in cp/typeck2.c. /* FIXME: Ordered removal is O(1) so the whole function is worst-case quadratic. This could be fixed using an aside b

Ask for suggestions on init_caller_save

been called or not. 4. There are only three global function in caller-save.c: init_save_areas, setup_save_areas, and save_call_clobbered_regs. We can just add a check in the beginning of those functions. If the data has not been initialized, just init_caller_save first. Any suggestions

Question about RTL code hoisting

pass which should have handled or be able to be easily adapted to handle this case? Thanks! -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery (650) 331-3385 x735

Re: Question about RTL code hoisting

On 03/25/2010 11:22 PM, Jeff Law wrote: On 03/25/10 09:14, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 03/25/2010 04:03 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: I just found that the current RTL code hoisting cannot optimize REG = ... if (cond) { r0 = REG; } else { r0 = REG; ... } to REG = ... r0 = REG; if (cond

Re: Question about RTL code hoisting

On 03/25/2010 11:24 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: I just found that the current RTL code hoisting cannot optimize REG = ... if (cond) { r0 = REG; } else { r0 = REG; ... } to REG = ... r0 = REG; if (cond

Question about gen_rtx_VAR_LOCATION

There are two calls of gen_rtx_VAR_LOCATION in cfgexpand.c. Both calls cast a tree to rtx as the third argument. Why a tree is used in RTL expression? Will it be transformed into RTL later or all RTL passes should recognize it's a tree and just ignore it? Thanks. -- Jie Zhang CodeSou

Re: Question about gen_rtx_VAR_LOCATION

On 03/26/2010 11:36 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:27:24PM +0800, Jie Zhang wrote: There are two calls of gen_rtx_VAR_LOCATION in cfgexpand.c. Both calls cast a tree to rtx as the third argument. Why a tree is used in RTL expression? Will it be transformed into RTL later or

Re: Ask for suggestions on init_caller_save

On 03/30/2010 12:11 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 03/23/10 21:30, Jie Zhang wrote: I'm fixing a bug. It's caused by uninitialized caller save pass data. One function in the test case uses the "optimize" attribute with "O2" option. So even with -O0 in command line, GCC c

Re: gcc- 4.6.0 20100416 rtmutex.c:1138:1: internal compiler error

reprocessed source file in GCC's bugzilla. -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery (650) 331-3385 x735

Re: gcc- 4.6.0 20100416 rtmutex.c:1138:1: internal compiler error

ce file so people can reproduce your issue. -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery (650) 331-3385 x735

libmudflap and emutls question

Hi, I encountered a recursive call problem between libmudflap and emutls when testing libmudflap for Blackfin. But I think this issue affects all targets without TLS. One libmudflap test case in the testsuite calls __wrap_calloc. In __wrap_calloc, __mf_state_1 is looked by __mf_get_state to

Re: libmudflap and emutls question

Hi Frank, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: Jie Zhang writes: To break the recursive loop, one solution is to force emutls to call the real calloc. [...] If it were acceptable to change emutls on account of mudflap, this sort of thing could work. Other alternatives would include having emutls

Re: libmudflap and emutls question

Hi Paolo, Thanks for your review! Paolo Bonzini wrote: +AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([__thread int a; int b; int main() { return a = b; }], + [if grep __emutls_get_address conftest.$ac_objext >/dev/null ; then grepping in a binary file is not portable. If this works it would be

Re: libmudflap and emutls question

Hi Paolo, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Both are same. Ah, I see, the call is optimized out because __emutls_get_address is const. You can try __thread int a; int main () { return *(int *)__emutls_get_address ((void *)0) == a; } I don't have an emutls target at hand, but it does fail on Li

Re: libmudflap and emutls question

Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 11:38:55AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Which version of gcc did you use? gcc 4.1 (maybe and 4.2) will report error. But gcc 4.3 compiles OK. I tested using x86_64 native gcc from Debian unstable. __emutls_get_address is defined in libgcc even the tar

GCC viewcvs issue

essed(text): File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygments/lexers/compiled.py", line 155, in get_tokens_unprocessed for index, token, value in \ File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/pygments/lexer.py", line 479, in get_tokens_unprocessed m = rexmatch(

Question on REG_EQUAL documentation

REG_EQUAL notes are still kept around. So the compiler passes after register allocation need check for both REG_EQUIV notes and REG_EQUAL notes. Is my understanding correct? [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Insns.html#index-REG_005fEQUIV-2258 -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery (650) 331-3385

Re: complete list of emulated TLS targets.

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 07/06/2010 10:39 PM, IainS wrote: >> I'd like to compile a complete list of targets affected by changes in >> emulated TLS. >> >> *-*-darwin* >> hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 >> cris-*-elf >> >> I think also; >> >> *-*-mingw >> *-*-cygwin >> >> could

GCC Bugzilla is broken now

time and date of the error. It was OK just two or three hours ago. -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery

Re: A question about patch submission

with the main branch. Yes. You need port your patch to SVN trunk before submit it. -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery

Re: A question about patch submission

On 07/13/2010 12:20 PM, Mingming Sun wrote: On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: On 07/13/2010 11:56 AM, Mingming Sun wrote: I want to submit a patch about loongson 3A, a new architecture different from loongson 2E&2F. My patch is based on Gcc4.4.0. If I want to submi

Re: GCC Bugzilla is broken now

On 07/13/2010 11:13 AM, Jie Zhang wrote: I got this when trying to access http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44921 Software error: Can't rename data/versioncache.Xg5KN to versioncache at globals.pl line 306. For help, please send mail to the webmaster (sourcemas...@sourcewar

gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-9.c and small memory target

y small M and N, the test will be still valid. Which way do you like most? Regards, -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery

Re: gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-9.c and small memory target

On 08/11/2010 11:47 PM, Sebastian Pop wrote: On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:29, Jie Zhang wrote: Hi Sebastian, I currently encountered an issue when testing gcc.dg/graphite/interchange-9.c on a ARM bare-metal board which has only 4MB memory. Apparently, with #define N #define M &quo

Questions about selective scheduler and PowerPC

the hack in 2? Thoughts? Regards, -- Jie Zhang CodeSourcery

Re: Questions about selective scheduler and PowerPC

Hi Andrey, On 10/18/2010 03:13 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: Hi Jie, On 18.10.2010 10:49, Jie Zhang wrote: When this error happens, FENCE_ISSUED_INSNS (fence) is 2 and issue_rate is 1. PowerPC 8540 is capable to issue 2 instructions in one cycle, but rs6000_issue_rate lies to scheduler that

Re: Questions about selective scheduler and PowerPC

On 10/18/2010 03:41 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: On 18.10.2010 11:31, Jie Zhang wrote: Hi Andrey, On 10/18/2010 03:13 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: Hi Jie, On 18.10.2010 10:49, Jie Zhang wrote: When this error happens, FENCE_ISSUED_INSNS (fence) is 2 and issue_rate is 1. PowerPC 8540 is

Re: Questions about selective scheduler and PowerPC

On 10/19/2010 10:16 PM, Andrey Belevantsev wrote: On 19.10.2010 17:57, Jie Zhang wrote: Removing the failing assert fixes the test case. But I wonder why not just get max_issue correct. I'm testing the attached patch. IMHO, max_issue looks confusing. * The concept of ISSUE POINT has never

Re: Questions about selective scheduler and PowerPC

On 10/21/2010 04:08 AM, Pat Haugen wrote: On 10/18/2010 10:33 AM, Jeff Law wrote: On 10/18/10 09:22, David Edelsohn wrote: On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote: On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 02:49:21PM +0800, Jie Zhang wrote: 3. The aforementioned rs6000 hack rs6000_issue_rate was

Re: Questions about selective scheduler and PowerPC

On 10/23/2010 01:50 AM, Pat Haugen wrote: On 10/20/2010 7:48 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: Running CPU2006, with the hack removed I see about a 1% improvement in specint (10% in 456.hmmer, a couple others in the 3% range, -3% 401.bzip2) and a 1% degradation in specfp (mainly due to a 13% degradation in

Question on ARM legitimate address for DImode

c8e3a767ba9 log: (LEGITIMIZE_ADDRESS): Push constants that will never be legitimate -- symbols and labels -- into registers. Handle DImode better. I checked out that revision to take a look but didn't find an obvious reason for such small index range. Did I miss something tricky? If there i

Re: Question on ARM legitimate address for DImode

On 12/21/2010 06:12 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 12:12 +0800, Jie Zhang wrote: Hi, While working on a bug, I found some code in ARM port that I don't understand. In ARM_LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS and arm_legitimize_address, we allow a very small offset for D

Behavior change of driver on multiple input assembly files

we go? [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg01322.html [2] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg01880.html Regards, -- Jie Zhang * gcc.c (default_compilers[]): Set combinable field to 0 for all assembly languages. Index: gcc.c

Re: Behavior change of driver on multiple input assembly files

On 12/31/2010 01:07 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: I just found a behavior change of driver on multiple input assembly files. Previously (before r164357), for the command line gcc -o t t1.s t2.s , the driver will call assembler twice, once for t1.s and once for t2.s. After r164357, the driver will only

Re: Behavior change of driver on multiple input assembly files

On 01/04/2011 07:33 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: For a minimal fix, I propose to change combinable fields of assembly languages in default_compilers[] to 0. See the attached patch "gcc-not-combine-assembly-inputs.diff". I don'

Find a new maintainer for option handling?

m in GCC was on 2005-01-19, which was nearly 6 years ago. So I guess he might have not worked on GCC. If this is true, how about assigning a new maintainer for option handling? Regards, -- Jie Zhang

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

On 01/12/2011 06:07 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Jie Zhang wrote: Dear Steering Committee: The current listed maintainer for option handling is: option handling Neil Booth n...@daikokuya.co.uk But I'm wondering if Neil is still a

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

Dear Steering Committee: Is unifying driver and option handling maintainership a good idea? On 01/12/2011 06:14 PM, Jie Zhang wrote: On 01/12/2011 06:07 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:10 AM, Jie Zhang wrote: Dear Steering Committee: The current listed maintainer for

Re: Find a new maintainer for option handling?

On 01/17/2011 10:35 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Jie Zhang wrote: I agree. I think Joseph is the best candidate for the maintainer of the option handling since he made the most changes of gcc/opts-common.c. He is already the maintainer of the driver. If we unify these two

Which program can I use to see VCG dumping from GCC

Hi, In this page , it's said that "If you view these files using a suitable program, you'll get output similar to the following." However, when I use xvcg to view test.c.01.sibling.vcg, xvcg errors: Wait.aLine 5: attribute T_Co_hidden currently not implement

Re: Which program can I use to see VCG dumping from GCC

On 1/26/06, Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > In this page <http://gcc.gnu.org/news/egcs-vcg.html>, it's said that > "If you view these files using a suitable program, you'll get output > similar to the following." However, when I use xv

Help needed on libgcc.a

Hi, I'm adding some assembly floating point functions to bfin port. These functions are much faster than those in fp-bit.c. However, they relax some IEEE floating point standard rules for checking inputs against NaN. So I think we'd better to call them only when -ffast-math or -ffinite-math-only i

Object size checking builtin test case and uClibc

Hi, In gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib/chk.c, vsnprintf () is defined using vsprintf (). While vsnprintf () in uClibc is defined using vsnprintf (). When testing on uClinux with uClibc, pr23484-chk.c failed because these two functions will call each other recursively and finally overflow the st

Re: Object size checking builtin test case and uClibc

Jie Zhang wrote: Hi, In gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib/chk.c, vsnprintf () is defined using vsprintf (). While vsnprintf () in uClibc is defined using ^ Sorry, should be vsprintf vsnprintf (). When testing on uClinux with uClibc, pr23484-chk.c failed

Re: Object size checking builtin test case and uClibc

On 3/18/06, Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jie Zhang wrote: > > Hi, > > > > In gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/lib/chk.c, vsnprintf () is defined > > using vsprintf (). While vsnprintf () in uClibc is defined using >

Re: apply for the relevant forms

On 6/5/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Our Co. have a new 32b embedded processor, and we have ported the gcc backend for it(support c/c++), now we want add its backend code into gcc packages. i read the "Contributing to GCC " pages that we must sign some forms, can you kindly sen

-fvtable-gc

It should has been removed from c.opt in the patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-07/msg02660.html. But it's still in trunk and branches 3.4/4.0/4.1/4.2. Jie

Set environment variable on remote target

libmudflap tests set a environment MUDFLAP_OPTIONS=-viol-segv before testing such that violations are promoted to SIGSEGV signals in testing. Otherwise, the exit value would be 0 even the test has violations. libmudflap testsuite depends on the exit value of tests to decide if the test PASS or

Re: Set environment variable on remote target

Andreas Schwab wrote: Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: @@ -261,7 +262,11 @@ proc rsh_exec { boardname program pargs inp outp } { set inp "/dev/null" } -set ret [local_exec "$RSH $rsh_useropts $hostname sh -c '$program $pargs \\; echo XYZ\\\${?

Re: Set environment variable on remote target

Andreas Schwab wrote: Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Andreas Schwab wrote: Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: @@ -261,7 +262,11 @@ proc rsh_exec { boardname program pargs inp outp } { set inp "/dev/null" } -set ret [local_exec "$RSH $r

Re: Set environment variable on remote target

Andreas Schwab wrote: Jie Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: So we have to use single quotes. The updated patch is attached. This will break if the value can contain single quotes. How about using double quotes but escaping ", \, $, and ` using backslash? The patch is attached.

Re: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-08-09)

On 8/10/07, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are there any folks out there who have projects for Stage 1 or Stage 2 > that they are having trouble getting reviewed? Any comments > re. timing for Stage 3? > I have many bfin port patches which have not been merged into upstream. I hope I c

Re: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2007-08-09)

Jie Zhang wrote: On 8/10/07, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Are there any folks out there who have projects for Stage 1 or Stage 2 that they are having trouble getting reviewed? Any comments re. timing for Stage 3? I have many bfin port patches which have not been merge

Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

libstdc++ tries to avoid link tests when configured with newlib. But I saw this when working on bfin port gcc: checking whether -lc should be explicitly linked in... no checking dynamic linker characteristics... no checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate checking for shl

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: libstdc++ tries to avoid link tests when configured with newlib. But I saw this when working on bfin port gcc: checking whether -lc should be explicitly linked in... no checking dynamic linker characteristics... no checking how to hardcode library paths

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: But by design if gcc_no_link = no, link tests should be avoided. ??? I would have thought gcc_no_link = yes means link tests are avoided. Oops, I meant gcc_no_link = yes. Jie

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 07:55:45PM +0800, Jie Zhang wrote: libstdc++ tries to avoid link tests when configured with newlib. But I saw this when working on bfin port gcc: From config.log: /home/rask/build/gcc-bfin-unknown-elf/gcc/../ld/ld-new: cannot open

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 03:27:18PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: But by design if gcc_no_link = no, link tests should be avoided. ??? I would have thought gcc_no_link = yes means link tests are avoided. Oops, I

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: But by design if gcc_no_link = no, link tests should be avoided. ??? I would have thought gcc_no_link = yes means link tests are avoided. Oops, I meant gcc_no_link = yes. Stupid double negatives. Okay, so then

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Bernd Schmidt wrote: Jie Zhang wrote: bfin-elf-gcc -mfdpic failed to link a simple test case because code is put into L1 instruction sram and data is put into L1 data sram, but Blackfin immediate offset load instruction cannot access GOT since the gap between instruction sram and data sram is

Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote: /home/rask/build/gcc-bfin-unknown-elf/gcc/../ld/ld-new: crt532.o: No such file: No such file or directory I sorted that out by using your config/bfin/elf.h, but there's something weird. The first time configure runs, it will complain about GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES b