Yea, sorry.
I've noticed this upstream and committed a fix there.
Feel free to remove these lines (or wait until I do another merge
first thing tomorrow).
--kcc
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
>> r194221
>
> It breaks bootstrap on x86_64-apple-darwin10:
>
> /opt/gcc/bu
> r194221
It breaks bootstrap on x86_64-apple-darwin10:
/opt/gcc/build_a/./gcc/xg++ -B/opt/gcc/build_a/./gcc/ -nostdinc++ -nostdinc++
-I/opt/gcc/build_a/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0/libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0
-I/opt/gcc/build_a/x86_64-apple-darwin10.8.0/libstdc++-v3/include
-I
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:59:48PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
>> The attached patch is the libsanitizer mege from upstream r169371.
>> Automatically generated by libsanitizer/merge.sh
>> Tested with
>> rm -rf */{*/,}libsanitizer \
>>
http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/compiler-rt/trunk/lib/tsan/rtl/tsan_interface_atomic.cc?view=diff&r1=169378&r2=169379&pathrev=169379
We will integrate it later.
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> Yeah, but then there will be all that additional __sync_synchronize(),
> tha
Yeah, but then there will be all that additional __sync_synchronize(),
that are not needed if we use __atomic. And on the other hand, if we
have that __sync_synchronize(), then we do not need __atomic...
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:53:44PM +04
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 04:53:44PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:13:20PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >> I hope I addressed all your comments in this revision.
> >> I've fixed nand atomic operation, made atomic op
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:13:20PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> I hope I addressed all your comments in this revision.
>> I've fixed nand atomic operation, made atomic operations atomic again
>> and added visibility attribute to interface fu
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:59:48PM +0400, Konstantin Serebryany wrote:
> The attached patch is the libsanitizer mege from upstream r169371.
> Automatically generated by libsanitizer/merge.sh
> Tested with
> rm -rf */{*/,}libsanitizer \
> && make -j 50 \
> && make -C gcc check-g{cc,++}
> RUNTEST
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:13:20PM +0400, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> I hope I addressed all your comments in this revision.
> I've fixed nand atomic operation, made atomic operations atomic again
> and added visibility attribute to interface functions.
Mostly, still, __sync_lock_test_and_set isn't ful
Jakub,
I hope I addressed all your comments in this revision.
I've fixed nand atomic operation, made atomic operations atomic again
and added visibility attribute to interface functions.
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> LGTM
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Konstantin S
LGTM
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Konstantin Serebryany
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The attached patch is the libsanitizer mege from upstream r169371.
> Automatically generated by libsanitizer/merge.sh
> Tested with
> rm -rf */{*/,}libsanitizer \
> && make -j 50 \
> && make -C gcc check-g{cc,++}
> RU
11 matches
Mail list logo
