Chung-Lin Tang writes:
> On 2011/12/5 12:39 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Dec 4, 2011, at 3:29 AM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>> The problem is that MIPS has
>>> native TLS support, but the ABI has not "yet" been extended to MIPS16.
>>> MIPS16 is supposed to be link-compatible with non-MIPS16, s
On 2011/12/5 12:39 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2011, at 3:29 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>> The problem is that MIPS has
>> native TLS support, but the ABI has not "yet" been extended to MIPS16.
>> MIPS16 is supposed to be link-compatible with non-MIPS16, so we can't
>> use emultls, and
On Dec 4, 2011, at 3:29 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> The problem is that MIPS has
> native TLS support, but the ABI has not "yet" been extended to MIPS16.
> MIPS16 is supposed to be link-compatible with non-MIPS16, so we can't
> use emultls, and must simply say sorry().
>
> This patch adds dg-
Several profiling tests fail for MIPS16. The problem is that MIPS has
native TLS support, but the ABI has not "yet" been extended to MIPS16.
MIPS16 is supposed to be link-compatible with non-MIPS16, so we can't
use emultls, and must simply say sorry().
This patch adds dg-require-profiling to the
