but it didn't catch the case in PR78319.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00225.html
XFAILing is ok.
Agreed.
Thanks for checking Prathamesh.
Jeff
> Aldy's enhancements to catch.
> Hi Jeff,
> I tried Aldy's patch [1], but it didn't catch the case in PR78319.
>
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg00225.html
XFAILing is ok.
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Prathamesh
> >
> > jeff
>
>
--
Richard Biener
SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB
21284 (AG Nuernberg)
the uninit code helps your case
> (approved earlier today, so hopefully in the tree very soon). I quickly
> scanned the BZ. There's some overlap, but it might be too complex for
> Aldy's enhancements to catch.
Hi Jeff,
I tried Aldy's patch [1], but it didn't catch the
On 11/16/2016 01:23 PM, Prathamesh Kulkarni wrote:
Hi,
As discussed in PR, this patch marks the test-case to xfail on arm-none-eabi.
OK to commit ?
You might check if Aldy's change to the uninit code helps your case
(approved earlier today, so hopefully in the tree very soon). I quickly
scanne
();
+ /* marking this test as xfail on arm-none-eabi, see PR78319. */
if ( n || m || r || l)
- blah(v); /* { dg-bogus "uninitialized" "bogus warning" } */
+ blah(v); /* { dg-bogus "uninitialized" "bogus warning" { xfail
arm-none-eabi } } */
