> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:44:15 +0200 > From: Jan Hubicka <hubi...@ucw.cz>
> I also noticed that tests scanning output of late optimization passes are > now getting UNRESOLVED state with slim LTO. We don't really lose coverage > here because we test fat LTO with the other compilation, but probably easiest > is to enfore fat LTO all the time. > > Does the following seem resonable? > > Honza > > * gcc.dg/torture/pta-ptrarith-1.c: Force fat LTO. > * gcc.dg/torture/pta-ptrarith-2.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr23821.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pta-ptrarith-3.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr45704.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr50472.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/ipa-pta-1.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pta-callused-1.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr39074-2.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr39074.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr42898-2.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pr42898.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/pta-escape-1.c: Likewise. > * gcc.dg/torture/ssa-pta-fn-1.c: Likewise. Meh... Please no, this was the kind of scatter-patches my patch aimed to avoid... for example, easy to miss some tests. Instead, on top of my patch, just copy the scan-assembler_required_options proc to a scan-tree-dump_required_options. ...no wait, should forcing fat-lto be done for all tree-dumps? If only for a subset of tree-dumps augment the *_required_options proc API to take arguments that let you check for that. brgds, H-P
