On Sep 20, 2015, at 2:40 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> On 20 September 2015 at 22:32, Christophe Lyon
> wrote:
>> On 25 May 2015 at 22:16, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
>>> On 25 May 2015 at 21:56, Marek Polacek wrote:
Perhaps we should introduce GCC_BAD_LOC with a location_t argument and
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:43 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I think you should limit the effect of this patch to the dwarf2out use
> as the above doesn't make sense to me.
Since dwarf is so special, and since other clients already do something sort of
like this anyway, it isn’t unreasonable to make the
On Nov 4, 2015, at 4:15 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> I wonder if we'll manage to to get mode_for_size return BLKmode
> in case of an original mode that was not of a size multiple of
> HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT (and that's host dependent even…).
> We probably should use smallest_mode_for_size on a pre
On Nov 4, 2015, at 12:50 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Mike Stump writes:
>> Index: dwarf2out.c
>> ===
>> --- dwarf2out.c (revision 229720)
>> +++ dwarf2out.c (working copy)
>> @@ -155
On Nov 5, 2015, at 4:32 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> No idea on location lists but maybe this means we should just use the
> maximum supported integer mode for CONST_WIDE_INTs?
Ah, yeah, that sounds like a fine idea. Below is that version. I snuck in one
more change, as it was annoying me, and
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:02 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> 24:missing
On Nov 4, 2015, at 1:02 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> On 4 November 2015 at 09:45, Mike Stump wrote:
>> in the top of the tree. This is bad as the same line appears in a PASS: and
>> an XFAIL:. Each test case should be unique. Should it be updated to 64?
>
> I thin
On Nov 9, 2015, at 3:32 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> The aarch64 port does not define TARGET_SUPPORTS_WIDE_INT.
> Ok for trunk and GCC 5?
:-) I’d endorse it, but, best left to the target folks.
On Nov 6, 2015, at 5:06 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> If there are no substantial reasons to not check it in now, I’d like to
>> proceed and get it checked in. People can refine it further in tree if they
>> want. Any objections?
>
> Ok with a changelog entry and bootstrap/regtest.
Also commi
On Nov 9, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
On 11/09/2015 12:38 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> We might want to think about making a policy decision to try waiving
>> some of the testing requirements for target macro -> hook conversions.
>> Maybe try only a "build to cc1" requirement and see whether
On Nov 10, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:11:23PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
>> The following series of patches fixes all occurences of
>> left-shifting negative constants in C code which is undefined by
>> the C standard. The patches have been tested on s390x,
On Nov 10, 2015, at 6:56 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
> 2015-11-10 17:46 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Ilya Enkovich
>> wrote:
>>> 2015-11-10 15:33 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener :
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Richard,
>
> I t
I applied this one as obvious.
* Makefile.in (etags tags TAGS): Use && instead of ;.
Index: Makefile.in
===
--- Makefile.in (revision 230269)
+++ Makefile.in (working copy)
@@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ stamp-noasandir:
.PHONY: all et
My port needs the below patch. I think this was reduced by someone on a port
that didn’t use some features (TARGET_SHORT_BRANCH_CHEAPER) of tm.h.
So, the question is, is this the preferred way to do this? I don’t want to
hookize TARGET_SHORT_BRANCH_CHEAPER, which is the other fix.
If yes, Ok
On Nov 13, 2015, at 4:33 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
> No RISC architecture can store directly to MEM, so the expected RTL in
> g++.dg/init/vbase1.C is wrong. I am adding XFAIL for PowerPC.
So, completely non-portable test cases aren’t particularly nice. vbase1.C
fails for me as well, and it is
On Nov 16, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
> Yeah. Kenny was adamant that for wide-int we should have an UNSIGNED/SIGNED
Yeah, you can blame me. I think (, UNSIGNED) conveys more than (,true) or
(,false). The sad part is, this has always been true.
> enum rather than a boolean
On Nov 16, 2015, at 3:12 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> So I'd tend to want them either at the end of the file with a single #if
> CHECKING_P or as a separate foo-tests file.
Hum… I kinda don’t want the main files mucked up with tests. I think I’d
rather have
#if CHECKING_P
#include "test/expr-test.h
On Nov 17, 2015, at 8:50 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>
> Thanks for the pointer. How about the following?
Ok.
sizeof (*wfoo) or sizeof (wchar_t) or some such might be even more portable.
>
> Thanks, David
>
>
> Index: pr58708.C
> ==
On Nov 19, 2015, at 10:08 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc_assert terminates the process and no further testing is done,
> whereas the approach the kit tries to run as much of the testsuite as
> possible, and then fail if any errors occurred.
Running as much as possible is desirable over stopping a
On Nov 16, 2015, at 6:02 AM, Renlin Li wrote:
> On 14/11/15 00:33, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> No RISC architecture can store directly to MEM, so the expected RTL in
>> g++.dg/init/vbase1.C is wrong. I am adding XFAIL for PowerPC. This
>> probably should be disabled for ARM and other RISC architect
On Nov 23, 2015, at 3:13 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2015, David Malcolm wrote:
>
>> Is there (or could there be) a precanned dg- directive to ask if ObjC is
>> available?
>
> I don't think so. Normal practice is that each language's tests are in
> appropriate directories for th
On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:55 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>> That would be the ideal - though do we require randomization
> What do you hope to gain with randomization?
Please, no randomization.
I checked this in to fix a formatting issue. != binds more tightly than &&.
Index: lra-constraints.c
===
--- lra-constraints.c (revision 230982)
+++ lra-constraints.c (working copy)
@@ -2556,8 +2556,8 @@ process_alt_operands (in
On Dec 4, 2015, at 5:13 AM, Alan Lawrence wrote:
> On 05/11/15 21:43, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>>* graphite-optimize-isl.c (optimize_isl): Call
>>isl_options_set_schedule_maximize_band_depth.
>>
>>* gcc.dg/graphite/fuse-1.c: New.
>>* gcc.dg/graphite/fuse-2.c: New.
>>
On Dec 8, 2015, at 10:10 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, Tom de Vries wrote:
Can you approve the fdl part?
>>> Let's assume I can. Okay.
>> was the 'Okay' above:
>> - a figure of speech (as I read it), or
>> - an actual approval (conditional on the adding of the comment)
>> ?
This patch allows a target to increase the cost of anti-deps to better reflect
the actual cost on the machine.
This gets me get 5% more performance on an important inner loop by exposing the
actual cost of long dep chains that have lots of anti-deps in them. Be
scheduling the longer chain firs
On Oct 10, 2019, at 12:25 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Objective C V2 (m64) IVAR offset refs from Apple GCC-4.x have an indirection
> for m64 code on PPC (which is the only 64b user for Mach-O PIC). Apple GCC
> 4.x places the indirections in the .data section, however this seems to have
> been uni
On Oct 21, 2019, at 3:30 AM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 06:06:30PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Oct 2019, js...@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
>>> +Use "git commit" and "git push origin
>>> +master" to check in the patch.
>>
>> I will admit I made a couple of first c
On Aug 4, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2017 at 21:08, Mike Stump wrote:
>>
>> On May 16, 2017, at 5:16 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> The change I care about in 1.5.3
>>
>> So, we haven't talked much about the ve
On Aug 14, 2018, at 4:38 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Where possible (i.e. they are currently defined), I’ve synced the Darwin
> names with the ones
> emitted by clang.
Thanks.
On Aug 13, 2018, at 1:55 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> For Darwin when we switch between text sections a linker-visible symbol is
> required to preserve the linker’s “atom model”. Some time ago we implemented
> TARGET_ASM_FUNCTION_SWITCHED_TEXT_SECTIONS to provide this.
>
> A suitable symbol is now
On Aug 14, 2018, at 4:20 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> When function sub-sections are enabled, Darwin’s assembler needs the FDE
> local start
> label for each sub-section to follow a linker-visible one so that the FDE
> will be correctly
> associated with the code of the subsection.
>
> The current
On Aug 15, 2018, at 6:20 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> The fails on Darwin are because the section naming convention is different.
>
> The patch adds Darwin-specific section attributes and a corresponding
> target-specific scan-assembler clause.
>
> OK for trunk?
> affected branches (7, 8)?
Ok.
On Aug 15, 2018, at 7:22 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Darwin is stated to be SUSv6 compliant and, at that revision, pthread_barrier
> is optional.
> It is not implemented on any version at least up to Darwin18.
>
> This skips the tests currently attempted which use pthread_barrier.
>
> OK for trunk
On Aug 16, 2018, at 6:55 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> The Darwin toolchains have a separate debug linker (dsymutil) so that the
> link-time penalty for debug data is not usually seen. At present, it's not
> clear how we would support split DWARF on Darwin (or if it would bring
> any additional ben
On Aug 18, 2018, at 1:17 PM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> The point of running dsymutil automatically from collect2 is that it
> (collect2, lto-wrapper, etc) might be generating or using compiler
> temporary files that will be deleted at the end of the link process.
>
> dsymutil requires that it can s
On Aug 21, 2018, at 7:20 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> another missing stringify for _U_L_P_
>
> OK?
Ok.
=
On Aug 30, 2018, at 8:45 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Currently, we fail to detect some Darwin assembler capabilities because the
> configure tests rely on a BINUTILS objdump, which isn’t generally available
> on Darwin.
>
> Darwin uses a tool called "otool" to provide information about objects, a
On Jun 6, 2017, at 2:23 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> OK for trunk?
Ok.
On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:48 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> Something this large can be integration tested on a svn/git branch, if you
>> need others to help out.
>>
>
> It would probably be easier for me to maintain also, rather than
> continuously regenerating patches each time I make an update to
> r
On Jun 8, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> this patch removes the additional_flags=-DNO_TRAMPOLINES addition, and
> instead uses the effective target trampolines.
> OK for trunk?
Ok.
On Jun 8, 2017, at 3:20 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> [ To complicate matters objc_target_compile tests for 'objc,no_trampolines'
> to set -DNO_TRAMPOLINES, but AFAICT that macro is not used anywhere in the
> objc test suites, so I think that's dead code. ]
Yes, Ok to remove the dead code as well.
On Jun 8, 2017, at 3:07 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
>
> Given that Enchant seems a stretch as a hard dependency,
But, by using autoconf, it isn't a hard dependency. If it is there, it is
built, if it isn't, it isn't. I think it should be trivial (10-20 lines) to do
this.
If you want to ship th
On Jun 9, 2017, at 1:25 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> Atm, -DSIGNAL_SUPPRESS is defined at top-level in gcc_target_compile
> resulting in the macro being passed down to ~30k compilations. The macro is
> used in just 17 test cases.
> OK for trunk if x86_64 and nvptx testing succeeds?
Ok.
On Jun 9, 2017, at 7:24 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> this patch adds effective target stack_size.
> OK for trunk if x86_64 and nvptx testing succeeds?
Ok.
The only last issue in this area that I know about is that there are a few more
test cases that need up to 48 MB to run, the problem is that t
On Jun 10, 2017, at 12:57 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> one thing that has bothered me on a regular basis is the inability to spread
> long dejagnu directives over multiple lines.
I'm not terribly in favor of this. I'd like to retain the ability to grep and
sed single line things. It makes exp
On Jun 12, 2017, at 11:34 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> I'm not sure who this is a question to really, but how much value is
> there in reviewing the other patches?
> Maybe people who know the
> frontend interface well could comment on that part, but would anyone
> here be able to do a meani
On Jun 15, 2017, at 3:49 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> It has long bothered me that many calls to dg-skip-if and its companions
> dg-xfail-if and dg-xfail-run-if in the testsuite are cluttered with the
> unnecessary default arguments ({ "*" } { "" } with and without braces).
> Now, this patch remov
On Jun 19, 2017, at 2:21 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>
> The attached patch removes the support for STACK_SIZE in the testcase
> as you suggested, and it works fine (cross-tested on aarch64/arm targets)
>
> OK for trunk?
Ok.
On Jun 14, 2017, at 5:30 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> 2017-06-14 Thomas Preud'homme
>
> * dg-cmp-results.sh: Keep test result lines rather than throwing
> header and summary to support sum files with multiple tools.
>
> Tested successfully on sum file with single tool with s
On Jun 19, 2017, at 10:11 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> I came across dg-add-options, and wondered if adding a dg-add-options feature
> stack_size is a better way to make STACK_SIZE available.
I don't have a strong opinion here, but, it does look a tad simpler and nicer.
> OK if complete and tes
On Jun 20, 2017, at 8:31 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> 2017-06-14 Thomas Preud'homme
>
> * dg-cmp-results.sh: Keep test result lines rather than throwing
> header and summary to support sum files with multiple tools.
>
>
> Is this still ok?
Ok.
On Jun 21, 2017, at 8:30 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> Commit r249422 to dg-cmp-results.sh broke the variant selection feature
> 2017-06-21 Thomas Preud'homme
>
> * dg-cmp-results.sh: Restore filtering on target variant.
>
>
> Tested on a file with multiple variants which now giv
On Jun 22, 2017, at 8:32 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> Sure. I'll do something with 20031023-1.c to ensure it or an equivalent
> is compiled with -fstack-check. That isn't totally unexpected. I
> would have also been receptive to adding -fstack-check to the torture flags.
Ouch. Though stack check
On Jun 22, 2017, at 10:21 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> This time with the test. Just #includes 20031023-1.c with a suitable dg
> directive to ensure we compile with -fstack-check.
>
> I won't be surprised if other targets fail this test. It's a really big
> stack frame :-)
The int16 people are goi
On Jun 24, 2017, at 10:52 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> On 28 May 2017 at 23:16, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> This patch adds D language support to the GCC testsuite.
>>
>> As well as generating the DejaGNU options for compile and link tests,
>> handles the conversion from DMD-style compiler options to G
On Jun 26, 2017, at 2:34 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
>> Is it OK to commit the following patch (darwin only)?
>
> this patch needs a ChangeLog entry (and preferably a description of the
> problem you're fixing ;-)
Actually, the CL isn't required, testsuite is special that way.
On Jun 26, 2017, at 2:26 AM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>
> Is it OK to commit the following patch (darwin only)?
Ok. As for [0-9a-f]*ing the numbers, at least 1 of test cases should retain
the actual number check. I'm fine with the resting being an RE, if someone
wants to do that.
On Jun 26, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> Mike Stump writes:
>
>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 2:34 AM, Rainer Orth
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is it OK to commit the following patch (darwin only)?
>>>
>>> this patch needs a ChangeLog e
On Jun 26, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>
>> Le 26 juin 2017 à 20:35, Mike Stump a écrit :
>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 2:26 AM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>>>
>>> Is it OK to commit the following patch (darwin only)?
>>
>> O
On Jun 9, 2017, at 6:57 AM, Simon Wright wrote:
>
> This PR was raised because of a bootstrap failure on Darwin.
> A question: I've checked for x86_64-apple-darwin*, is this OK or
> should it be more restrictive?
That seems ok.
Ok.
If anyone sees any fallout from this, please speak up. I'm h
On Nov 9, 2017, at 10:00 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> When gcc-dg-runtest is used to run a test the test is run several times
> with different options. For clarity of the log, the test infrastructure
> then append the options to the testname. This means that all the code
> that must deal wit
On Nov 10, 2017, at 11:55 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> A few not incorrect but not strictly intended (according to
> the function's original purpose) uses of strncpy trigger the
> new -Wstringop-truncation warning because they temporarily
> leave the copied string without a terminating nul.
If peopl
On Nov 10, 2017, at 12:36 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> The warning is included in -Wall
Ah, I missed that little detail the first time around. -Wall is special in
that we already just sanitize the source to pass it. I assumed it was a
non-wall flag someone added or wanted to add to the bootst
On Nov 12, 2017, at 6:05 AM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>
> The following patch fixes pr81706 tests on darwin
>
> --- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr81706.c 2017-10-26
> 07:16:18.0 +0200
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr81706.c 2017-11-11 16:02:36.0
> +0100
>
On Nov 12, 2017, at 6:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Dominique d'Humières
> wrote:
>> The following patch fixes PR68356, PR81210, and PR81693 on darwin.
>>
>> --- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr68264.c2016-01-28
>> 00:30:03.0 +0100
>> +++ gcc/t
On Nov 14, 2017, at 3:33 AM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>
>> Le 13 nov. 2017 à 18:40, Mike Stump a écrit :
>> On Nov 12, 2017, at 6:58 AM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Dominique d'Humières
>>> wrote:
>>>
On Nov 16, 2017, at 2:24 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> ISO C17 won't go to ballot until December, meaning publication of the
> standard won't be until 2018, leaving ambiguity as to whether people
> will end up referring to the standard as C17, as it's currently known
> and which corresponds to the
On Nov 27, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> There is also darwin9 support that apparently no one really cares about
> anymore.
I'm fine with removing stabs support from the compiler.
On Dec 5, 2017, at 9:54 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> dump-noaddr test FAILS when $tmpdir is not the same as the directory
>> where runtest is called from. Note that this does not happen when
>> running make check because tm
On Dec 5, 2017, at 11:11 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> On 05/12/17 17:54, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> dump-noaddr test FAILS when $tmpdir is not the same as the directory
>>> where runtest is called from. Note that this
On Dec 5, 2017, at 12:56 PM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> Thanks, I've tested after the two commits and it works both in tree and out
> of tree. It'll simplify comparing in tree results Vs out of tree for us,
> thanks a lot!
>
> Would you consider a backport to stable branches if nobody compl
On May 30, 2018, at 3:41 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> this patch tests the error behaviour of dg-final directives when called with
> an
> incorrect number of arguments.
Seems reasonable. Unless someone wanted to argue against it for some reason
(not portable, takes too much time, hard to maint
On Jan 19, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>
> I'm having a lot of heartburn over this because my test machine is
> experiencing disk slowdowns, so it's taking me up to 4 hours to complete
> a bootstrap and regression test.
Ah, the joys of crosses, no bootstrap. The gcc C testsuite runs i
On Jan 19, 2018, at 2:53 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> what do you think about deprecating the ARM-era for-scope handling
I endorse this idea. :-) 20 years is enough for anyone to update their code,
right? :-)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
On Jan 23, 2018, at 2:31 AM, Tamar Christina wrote:
>
> This patch makes dg-cmp-results.sh reject the use of log files in the
> comparison.
No please. We like to run that script on log files from time to time for
various reasons. I'd rather fix anything that prevents that from working as
ex
On Jan 23, 2018, at 4:18 AM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>
> As discussed (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-01/msg01778.html) this
> patch deprecates the ARM-era for scope.
The code gives:
if you use %<-fpermissive%> G++ will accept your code
I think we should no longer recommend a depreca
On Feb 2, 2018, at 5:25 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
>
> Given the overwhelming silence this proposal has received, i take it
> for granted that folks are thrilled and even up until now speechless
> :)
> -fno-ident ok for stage1?
> What about -fno-file? Clever alternative suggestions? Do
On Feb 5, 2018, at 9:54 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> "dict" was added in Tcl 8.5, but until a couple of weeks ago the
> testsuite has worked with 8.4.
>
> This patch uses arrays instead, like we do for the caching in
> target-supports.exp. It is a bit uglier than using dicts was,
> but hop
On Feb 5, 2018, at 8:42 AM, Douglas Mencken wrote:
>
> I’m about
>
> “ [PATCH 2/4] [Darwin,PPC] Remove uses of LR in
> restore_world ” https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42304
>
> look at bug #84113 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84113 for
> more info
>
> “ One import
On Feb 8, 2018, at 12:36 PM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 03:52:27PM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
>> I dusted the pointed to patch off and check it in. Let us know how it goes.
>
> I wanted to test this on the primary and secondary powerpc targets as
&g
On Mar 1, 2018, at 1:56 AM, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>
>> Le 1 mars 2018 à 09:37, Richard Biener a écrit :
>>
>> In the PR Dominique says "With the patch the failures (-m32/-m64) went
>> down from 1059 to 467" which is a nice improvement. I'm not set up
>> to bootstrap on darwin but I expe
On Mar 13, 2018, at 10:12 AM, Thomas Preudhomme
wrote:
>
> scan-assembler-times and scan-tree-dump-times dejagnu directives show a
> different output in the summary files depending on whether they PASS or
> FAIL. This means that dg-cmp-results would not show a regression because
> it would not s
On Mar 23, 2018, at 11:52 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> asan doesn't work under ulimit -v, which I want to use on shared hosts
> to avoid causing trouble with runaway processes. There doesn't seem
> to be a way within expect to access getrlimit/setrlimit, so in this
> patch I call out to the shel
On Sep 5, 2018, at 6:29 AM, Joey Ye wrote:
> This is a fix to an obvious issue in gcov.exp, where proc verify-intermediate
> returns without closing the open file.
>
> This can be a possible fix to PR85871. gcov-8.C diffs to other gcov testcases
> that it invokes verify-intermediate. Not closin
On Sep 5, 2018, at 4:52 AM, a...@codesourcery.com wrote:
> There are a number of tests that fail because they assume that exceptions are
> available, but GCN does not support them, yet.
So, generally we don't goop up the testsuite with the day to day port stuff
when it is being developed. If the
Ok.
On Sep 19, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> On 18 September 2018 at 02:36, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds D language support to the GCC testsuite.
>>
>> As well as generating the DejaGNU options for compile and link tests,
>> handles the conversion from DMD-style compiler opt
On Sep 19, 2018, at 1:49 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> On 18 September 2018 at 02:38, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> This patch add the Phobos runtime library and license (Boost) files.
>> Phobos is the standard runtime library that comes with the D language
>> compiler. The bulk of which is comprised most
On Sep 17, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> This patch adds a further number of tests, but were added as part of
> fixing gdc-specific bugs.
Ok. Trivial, and self-review applicable.
On Sep 17, 2018, at 5:36 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> This patch adds part of the D2 testsuite, which includes D source code
> files that are considered compilable; files that are considered
> uncompilable, but should not ICE; and files that should execute on
> targets with crash or assertion failu
On Sep 17, 2018, at 5:37 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> This patch adds a further number of tests, but were added as part of
> fixing gdc-specific bugs.
Ok. Trivial, and self-review applicable.
On Sep 21, 2018, at 2:38 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>
> On 21 September 2018 at 22:54, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Sep 17, 2018, at 5:36 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>> This patch adds part of the D2 testsuite, which includes D source code
>>> files that ar
On Sep 24, 2018, at 11:45 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>
> the test added to check whether _Float128 types are handled correctly by
> the new warning about suspicious calls to abs-like functions fails on
> many platforms. The patch below circumvents the problem by running on
> i686/x86_64 only. I u
On Oct 3, 2018, at 1:32 PM, Bill Seurer wrote:
>
> [PATCH, rs6000] Fix expected error output for test case.
>
> Is this ok for trunk?
Ok.
On Oct 3, 2018, at 8:48 PM, Stafford Horne wrote:
>
> -mm-dd Stafford Horne
> Richard Henderson
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.c-torture/execute/20101011-1.c: Adjust for OpenRISC.
> * gcc.dg/20020312-2.c: Likewise.
> * gcc.dg/attr-alloc_size-11.c: Li
On Aug 6, 2014, at 9:04 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> which we may restrict better with checking whether the pointer
>> uses a partial integer mode. Not sure how PSImode -> SImode
>> "extends" on RTL?
> Well, at least on the mn102, I defined both a zero and sign extension for PSI
> -> SI. So whichever
On Aug 6, 2014, at 12:56 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
>> My concern is the code we're removing discusses the need to simplify when
>> these expressions are in static initializers. What's going to ensure that
>> we're still simplifying instances which appear in static initializers? I
>> don't see an
On Aug 6, 2014, at 12:45 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
>> What’s PSImode?
>
> PSImode is a mode with more precision than HImode, but less than SImode.
:-) I phrase it this way, there is no PSImode anymore in gcc. It is gone, the
concept is gone. Some ports can choose to create a mode for the port
On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:38 AM, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>
> Thanks for the detailed explanation, the linker errors I was seeing were
> about relocations being truncated.
Ah, those are bugs in your port! You should be able to generate large code and
then relax it into short small code. Large code,
401 - 500 of 2403 matches
Mail list logo
