*Ping*

Richard, you approved adding "target nonpic" last time, could you
please take quick a look?

I regularly encounter failing due to "AVAIL_OVERWRITABLE" tests on
Android.. When people write tests they don't consider pic targets.

thanks,
Alexander

2013/7/8 Alexander Ivchenko <aivch...@gmail.com>:
> *Ping*
>
>>>> Another bunch of tests that fails with -fpic.
>>>>
>>>> from here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00539.html
>>>> "Since -fpic option is turned on by default in Android we have certain test
>>>> fails. The reason for that is that those tests rely on the
>>>> availability of functions, defined in them
>>>> and with -fpic compiler conservatively assumes that they are
>>>> AVAIL_OVERWRITABLE."
>>>>
>>>>  I added {target nonpic} to them as before.
>
> Is the attached patch ok?
>
> We already did that for some tests before here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00975.html
> So, considering that, it should be a pretty obvious fix.
>
> thanks,
> Alexander
>
> 2013/6/11 Alexander Ivchenko <aivch...@gmail.com>:
>> Yep, that also works for us. I updated the patch. Is it ok for trunk?
>>
>> --Alexander
>>
>> 2013/6/5 Patrick Marlier <patrick.marl...@gmail.com>:
>>> Hi Alexander,
>>>
>>> At least for TM testcase, I would prefer to add 'transaction_safe'
>>> attribute on foobar as in the attached patch.
>>> Aldy and Richard H: What do you think?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Alexander Ivchenko <aivch...@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Another bunch of tests that fails with -fpic.
>>>>
>>>> from here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00539.html
>>>> "Since -fpic option is turned on by default in Android we have certain test
>>>> fails. The reason for that is that those tests rely on the
>>>> availability of functions, defined in them
>>>> and with -fpic compiler conservatively assumes that they are
>>>> AVAIL_OVERWRITABLE."
>>>>
>>>>  I added {target nonpic} to them as before.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Is it ok for trunk?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Alexander

Reply via email to