On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 05:42:58PM -0700, Seongbae Park (박성배, 朴成培) wrote: > On 10/19/07, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: "Seongbae Park (박성배, 朴成培)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:25:14 -0700 > > > > > If you're not in a hurry, can you wait > > > till I run the regtest against 4.2 on x86-64 ? > > > I've already discussed the patch with Kenny > > > and we agreed that this is the right approach, > > > but I'd like to see the clean regtest on x86 for both 4.2 and 4.3 > > > before I approve. > > > Thanks, > > > > I am in no rush, please let me know if you want some help > > tracking down the failure you are seeing. > > > > Since you say it is a libgomp failure... I wonder if some of > > the atomic primitives need some side effect markings which > > are missing and thus exposed by not clobbering global regs > > at call sites any more. > > It looks like it's just a flaky test - it randomly fails on my test machine > with or without the patch (for interested, it's omp_parse3.f90 with -O0).
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33275 H.J.
