On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 04:28:59PM +0100, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Am 18.01.25 um 19:30 schrieb Dimitar Dimitrov:
> > This test fails on AVR.
> >
> > Debugging the test on x86 host, I noticed that u in function s sometimes
> > has value 16128. The "t <= 3 * u" expression in the same function
> >
Am 18.01.25 um 19:30 schrieb Dimitar Dimitrov:
This test fails on AVR.
Debugging the test on x86 host, I noticed that u in function s sometimes
has value 16128. The "t <= 3 * u" expression in the same function
results in signed integer overflow for targets with sizeof(int)=16.
Fix by requiring
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 07:06:16PM +, Sam James wrote:
> Dimitar Dimitrov writes:
>
> > This test fails on AVR.
> >
> > Debugging the test on x86 host, I noticed that u in function s sometimes
> > has value 16128. The "t <= 3 * u" expression in the same function
> > results in signed integer
Dimitar Dimitrov writes:
> This test fails on AVR.
>
> Debugging the test on x86 host, I noticed that u in function s sometimes
> has value 16128. The "t <= 3 * u" expression in the same function
> results in signed integer overflow for targets with sizeof(int)=16.
>
> Fix by requiring int32 eff
This test fails on AVR.
Debugging the test on x86 host, I noticed that u in function s sometimes
has value 16128. The "t <= 3 * u" expression in the same function
results in signed integer overflow for targets with sizeof(int)=16.
Fix by requiring int32 effective target.
Also add return stateme
