Re: New test is invalid for AVR

2008-08-08 Thread Andreas Krebbel
Hello Ian, > In that case, just comment out the bulk of the test based on > STACK_SIZE. Ok. How about that patch? It should be ok until someone digs out a target with a stack size below 64 bytes ;) (plus the bytes for the other auto variables). I've decided not to disable the testcase completel

RE: New test is invalid for AVR

2008-08-08 Thread Dave Korn
Ian Lance Taylor wrote on 08 August 2008 01:17: > "Dave Korn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Ian Lance Taylor wrote on 07 August 2008 19:20: >> >>> If the test will run on most normal targets, then a better approach is >>> to add something like >>> >>> #if defined(STACK_SIZE) && STACK_SIZE <

Re: s-oscons technique does not work for RTEMS

2008-08-08 Thread Samuel Tardieu
> "Thomas" == Thomas Quinot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Thomas> As an alternative to Arno's suggestion, maybe you could use Thomas> the --with-sysroot configure parameter to make the required Thomas> headers available to the build process. I know others have Thomas> used this method on some cr

Re: s-oscons technique does not work for RTEMS

2008-08-08 Thread Joel Sherrill
Samuel Tardieu wrote: "Thomas" == Thomas Quinot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Thomas> As an alternative to Arno's suggestion, maybe you could use Thomas> the --with-sysroot configure parameter to make the required Thomas> headers available to the build process. I know others have Tho

Re: New test is invalid for AVR

2008-08-08 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
"Andreas Krebbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I've decided not to disable the testcase completely for small stack > sizes. Although it is unlikely that it triggers the reload problem in > some way the testcase is weird enough to trigger something else. > > Ok for mainline? OK. Thanks. Ian

gcc-4.4-20080808 is now available

2008-08-08 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20080808 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20080808/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk

Is the following "dg" syntax correct?

2008-08-08 Thread Dominique Dhumieres
Is the following syntax correct? /* { dg-require-effective-target ilp32 && dfp } */ It appears in gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr32000-2.c and gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/stackalign/return-3.c. TIA Dominique

GCC 4.4.0 Status Report (2008-08-08)

2008-08-08 Thread Mark Mitchell
Status == It's time to start moving GCC 4.4.0 towards a release, with a release target date in Q4 2008 or Q1 2009. We have had an extraordinarily long Stage 1 in order to allow development of a variety of important functionality, including the IRA register allocator, tuples, the Graphite

GCC 4.3.2 Status Report (2008-08-08)

2008-08-08 Thread Mark Mitchell
Status == The GCC 4.3 branch is open for commits under normal release branch rules. We are trying to drive towards a 4.3.2 release, but there are still two P1s: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36998 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37014 These look like issues tha