On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Rainer Orth
>> wrote:
>>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>>>
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
>>> The new proc is bogus, unfortunatel
"H.J. Lu" writes:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
>>> wrote:
"H.J. Lu" writes:
>> The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
>> check_effective_target_pie
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
>> wrote:
>>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>>>
> The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
> check_effective_target_pie that checks if a target can supp
"H.J. Lu" writes:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
> wrote:
>> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>>
The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
check_effective_target_pie that checks if a target can support PIE. The
new one just overrides the previous one. O
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" writes:
>
>>> The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
>>> check_effective_target_pie that checks if a target can support PIE. The
>>> new one just overrides the previous one. On targets supporting PIE
>>>
"H.J. Lu" writes:
>> The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
>> check_effective_target_pie that checks if a target can support PIE. The
>> new one just overrides the previous one. On targets supporting PIE
>> (like Darwin), but not defaulting to it, the PIE tests sudde
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Rainer Orth
wrote:
> Jeff Law writes:
>
>>> Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Add check_effective_target_pie
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This patch adds check_effective_target_pie to check if the current
>>> multilib generates PIE by default.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> H.J.
>>> ---
>>> 2
Jeff Law writes:
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Add check_effective_target_pie
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds check_effective_target_pie to check if the current
>> multilib generates PIE by default.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> H.J.
>> ---
>> 2015-01-11 H.J. Lu
>>
>> * gcc.target/i386/pie.c: New test.
>
On 01/13/15 05:52, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 03:04:20PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/12/15 14:51, Magnus Granberg wrote:
måndag 12 januari 2015 12.11.17 skrev H.J. Lu:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/12/15 12:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
I don't know if -pg will
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 03:04:20PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/12/15 14:51, Magnus Granberg wrote:
> >måndag 12 januari 2015 12.11.17 skrev H.J. Lu:
> >>On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>>On 01/12/15 12:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
> I don't know if -pg will work PIE on any targe
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 03:04:20PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/12/15 14:51, Magnus Granberg wrote:
> >måndag 12 januari 2015 12.11.17 skrev H.J. Lu:
> >>On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>>On 01/12/15 12:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
> I don't know if -pg will work PIE on any targe
On 01/12/15 14:51, Magnus Granberg wrote:
måndag 12 januari 2015 12.11.17 skrev H.J. Lu:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 01/12/15 12:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
I don't know if -pg will work PIE on any targets. For Linux/x86
the choices of crt1.o are
%{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:g
måndag 12 januari 2015 12.11.17 skrev H.J. Lu:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 01/12/15 12:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> I don't know if -pg will work PIE on any targets. For Linux/x86
> >> the choices of crt1.o are
> >>
> >> %{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:gcrt1.o%s;pie:Scrt1.o%
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/12/15 12:59, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> I don't know if -pg will work PIE on any targets. For Linux/x86
>> the choices of crt1.o are
>>
>> %{!shared: %{pg|p|profile:gcrt1.o%s;pie:Scrt1.o%s;:crt1.o%s}}
>>
>> -shared, -pg and -pie are mutually exc
On 01/12/15 12:29, H.J. Lu wrote:
Is this an inherent restriction of -fPIE, or is it merely an implementation
detail? If the latter, is that implementation detail a target issue? ie,
could we have a target that supports profiling in conjunction with -fPIE?
If so, then this test seems too restr
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/11/15 16:58, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds check_effective_target_pie to check if the current
>> multilib generatse PIE by default. I will submit other patches to use
>> it. OK for trunk?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> H.J.
>> ---
>
On 01/11/15 16:58, H.J. Lu wrote:
Hi,
This patch adds check_effective_target_pie to check if the current
multilib generatse PIE by default. I will submit other patches to use
it. OK for trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2015-01-11 H.J. Lu
* gcc.target/i386/pie.c: New test.
* lib/t
Hi,
This patch adds check_effective_target_pie to check if the current
multilib generatse PIE by default. I will submit other patches to use
it. OK for trunk?
Thanks.
H.J.
---
2015-01-11 H.J. Lu
* gcc.target/i386/pie.c: New test.
* lib/target-supports.exp (check_profiling_
18 matches
Mail list logo
