--- Comment #26 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-15 13:21 ---
I have open pr42378 for the remaining failures in comment #21 (I did not
include libffi.call/nested_struct5.c that is pr34311). Closing this PR as
fixed, please reopen if you disagree.
--
dominiq at lps dot ens
--- Comment #25 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-05 12:54 ---
If there is no objection, I'll close tomorrow this pr as fixed. The failure of
libffi.call/nested_struct5.c is pr34311 (Opened: 2007-12-01) and I'll open a
new pr for the failures of libffi.call/cls_*double_va.c.
-
--- Comment #24 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-04 21:00 ---
> Have you tried r154983 with
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg00255.html?
The patch does not change anything, I get the same failures with or without it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Comment #23 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-04 18:34 ---
> Have you tried r154983 with
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg00255.html?
Not yet!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #22 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-04
18:13 ---
Have you tried r154983 with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg00255.html?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #21 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-04 16:27 ---
At revision 154983, I get
=== libffi tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern test, is -0.0
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble_va.c -O0 -W -Wall out
--- Comment #20 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-04 08:25 ---
At revision 154970, there are still 16 failures, but the error has changed for
libffi.call/cls_longdouble.c:
...
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern test, is 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8: 36
...
Looki
--- Comment #19 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-03 20:57 ---
At revision 154956 the results are:
=== libffi tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_double_va.c -O0 -W -Wall output pattern test, is -0.0
FAIL: libffi.call/cls_longdouble.c -O0 -W -W
--- Comment #18 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 19:09 ---
Subject: Bug 42243
Author: dje
Date: Thu Dec 3 19:09:29 2009
New Revision: 154956
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154956
Log:
PR libffi/42243
* src/powerpc/ffi_darwin.c (ffi_prep
--- Comment #17 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
18:02 ---
Can you verify that powerpc darwin calculates the stack location of FP
arguments correctly before your patch to see if it was a latent problem?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #16 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 17:42 ---
I found a system and backported the libffi changes. For some reason, Darwin is
calculating the stack location of FP arguments wrong.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #15 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 16:32 ---
One would not expect __ppc64__ to be defined for -m32. Thanks for the
confirmation.
I do not have access to a darwin system. Do either of you have enough PPC
assembly knowledge to step through libffi/testsuite/libffi
--- Comment #14 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
15:20 ---
Same is true for __ppc64__. For the Apple gcc-4.0 and 4.2 compilers as well as
FSF gcc-4.4.2, __ppc64__ is only defined at -m64 and not -m32 as would be
expected.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Comment #13 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 15:20 ---
One would assume ...
I do not see any differences that should cause the 11 FPR return value tests to
fail on Darwin but not AIX.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #12 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
15:17 ---
On powerpc-apple-darwin9 using a dual G5, for Apple's gcc 4.0 and 4.2 compilers
as well as FSF gcc 4.4.2's, one gets...
howarth% gcc -m32 -E -dM -x c /dev/null | grep LP64
howarth%
only at -m64 do all
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-03 14:12 ---
> Does Darwin define __ppc64__ in 32 bit mode on 64 bit systems?
I cannot answer the question, but I see
gcc/config/rs6000/darwin.h: if (TARGET_64BIT) builtin_define
("__ppc64__");\
Assuming powerpc-a
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #10 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 13:56 ---
The only unique change was in ffitarget.h:
#elif defined (POWERPC_DARWIN) && defined (__ppc64__) /* Darwin */
#define POWERPC64
Does Darwin define __ppc64__ in 32 bit mode on 64 bit systems?
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #9 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 13:46 ---
Bootstrap is fixed, but mysterious libffi failures remain.
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
19 matches
Mail list logo
