== GDB ==
* Worked on support for cross-platform core file generation.
After some discussion on the mailing list it seems we've
come to an agreement that the remote protocol ought to have
two separate packets related to memory layout, one that
describes the permanent, system-wide la
Spun Linaro GCC 4.6 release tarball, uploaded it to Michael's server,
and launched the testing.
Continued work on constant reuse optimization. I've now eliminated some
more false positives caused by inconsistent rtx_cost results. It turns
out the pass also fixes up inefficient constants genera
PR51068 appears to be a dup of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51051 . I've kicked off a
build on habitat.canonical.com with this patch applied to be sure that
the build and test continues
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/txt00199.txt
Ramana
_
Hi,
I've now put this at :
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2011-11-15
Are there any other topics that folks want to bring up ?
The one thing worth thinking about ahead of time is if we want to
bring ahead the call by an hour to allow Michael to join at a not so
crazy ho
On 11/10/2011 05:44 PM, Loïc Minier wrote:
> (Indeed, Ubuntu prepackaged Linaro-based cross-toolchains don't offer
> multilib; that'd be hard in this context.)
they do, but not the ones you want. ;-P
the cross toolchain knows about arm soft float and arm hard float, but not about
different proc
Hi,
> Are there any other topics that folks want to bring up ?
There are some issues exposed while testing the register pressure
estimation for SMS that I would to get some feedback on:
As discussed off-line; one thing is related to the note_uses function
which currently does not take element z
Revital Eres writes:
> Another issue is related to the regression I saw with SMS in libav's
> dsputil-ssd_int8_vs_int16_c.
> Consulting with Ayal regarding this it seemed that the
> regression was due to dependence between accumulations that can be
> avoided, more specifically we had the following
