On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 03:50:34PM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Joel Sherrill
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I ran into something tracking down a test
> >>failure on psim and now thing there is a
> >>target specific iss
Joe Buck wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 03:50:34PM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Joel Sherrill
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I ran into something tracking down a test
failure on psim and now thing there is a
target specific issue that needs addressin
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 03:50:34PM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Joel Sherrill
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I ran into something tracking down a test
> >>failure on psim and now thing there is a
> >>target specific issue that needs addressi
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Joel Sherrill
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I ran into something tracking down a test
failure on psim and now thing there is a
target specific issue that needs addressing.
lwsync is sync with the bit 9 set. So it should be ok as
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Joel Sherrill
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I ran into something tracking down a test
> failure on psim and now thing there is a
> target specific issue that needs addressing.
lwsync is sync with the bit 9 set. So it should be ok as it was a
reserved field
Hi,
I ran into something tracking down a test
failure on psim and now thing there is a
target specific issue that needs addressing.
libstdc++-v3/config/cpu/powerpc/atomic_word.h
uses the lwsync instruction if __NO_LWSYNC__
is not defined.
psim does not implement the lwsync instruction.
I chec
