On Fri, 2016-07-08 at 22:55 -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:46 PM, David Malcolm
> wrote:
> > This patch adds a new phony target to gcc/Makefile.in to make it
> > easy
> > to run the selftests under valgrind, via "make selftest-valgrind".
> > This phony target isn't a depen
On 7/6/16 6:29 PM, Michael Meissner wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 05:01:38PM -0500, Peter Bergner wrote:
I had thought about adding the dform scalar flag, but it was already
correctly disabled and I wasn't sure whether we could have the p9
dform scalar without the vector part. Probably not, so
On 7/6/16 12:53 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Peter Bergner wrote:
>> The following patch fixes a bug where we do not disable POWER9 vector dform
>> addressing when we compile for POWER9 but without VSX support. This
>> manifested
>> itself with us trying to use df
James Bowman schrieb:
The FT32 binutils use a bias to distinguish between RAM and flash
addresses.
This fix adds an ASM_OUTPUT_SYMBOL_REF() that unbiases references to
RAM symbols.
Only references to RAM objects have the bias applied. Flash objects
(that is, objects in ADDR SPACE 1) are not bia
This patch has caused some new libstdc++ testsuite failures on AIX.
FAIL: 23_containers/list/debug/insert4_neg.cc (test for excess errors)
Excess errors:
/tmp/20160708/powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.0.0/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/formatter.h:387:7:
error: __gnu_debug::_Error_formatter&
__gnu_debug::_Error_f
Hello world,
this patch fixes the regression by always allocating a charlen.
Why we still allocate a temporary even for obviously non-overlapping
cases like the test case remains to be investigated. I'll open a
separate PR for this.
Regression-tested. OK for all affected branches?
Regards
On 07/09/2016 01:16 PM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> this patch fixes the regression by always allocating a charlen.
>
> Why we still allocate a temporary even for obviously non-overlapping
> cases like the test case remains to be investigated. I'll open a
> separate PR for this.
>
>
On 09/07/16 13:47 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
This patch has caused some new libstdc++ testsuite failures on AIX.
Which patch?
My last patch only added a new test, that can't have caused failures
in unrelated tests.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++-cvs/2016-q3/msg00021.html
FAIL: 23_cont
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 09/07/16 13:47 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
>>
>> This patch has caused some new libstdc++ testsuite failures on AIX.
>
>
> Which patch?
>
> My last patch only added a new test, that can't have caused failures
> in unrelated tests.
>
> ht
