On 03/28/2014 03:52 PM, K_s, Vishnu wrote:
Hi all,
Some of the tests added in gcc.dg/graphite are failing for AVR target, Because
size of the arrays defined are 'too' large for AVR. I'm wondering is it
possible to reduce the size of the array's in tests.
One example is gcc.dg/graphite/scop-0.c,
H.J. Lu wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
Since we are nearing release, I thought I'd mention I see:
../../gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi:1114: warning: node next `Overall Options' in
menu `C Dialect Options' and in sectioning `Invoking G++' differ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
Dear All,
I gave a talk on "GCC plugins thru the MELT example" at the Linux
Foundation Collaboration Summit (Friday, March 28th 2014, Napa Valley,
California, USA)
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/collaboration-summit/
The slides of my talk are available online at
http://gcc-melt.org/g
Hello,
Adam Zabrocki's Adventure with stack smashing protection at
(http://blog.pi3.com.pl/?p=485 ) is kind of interesting. It lists some possible
weaknesses in GCC's -fstack-protector. Given that the weaknesses happen when the
stack has already been smashed I do not think they are critical but th
Hi,
So far I've been testing with hardware but I'm pretty sure I read
somewhere about an RL78 simulator, which would be a useful addition.
Does this simulator exist, and if so, how do I run the tests against it?
I tried 'make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=rl78-sim"' but in
amongst th
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Steven Stewart-Gallus
wrote:
>
> Adam Zabrocki's Adventure with stack smashing protection at
> (http://blog.pi3.com.pl/?p=485 ) is kind of interesting. It lists some
> possible
> weaknesses in GCC's -fstack-protector. Given that the weaknesses happen when
> the
Snapshot gcc-4.7-20140329 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.7-20140329/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.7 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
Thank you, I must then apologize to the GCC mailing list for bringing up
something off topic.
About GCC's _stack_chk_fail. Yeah, it's much simpler. Personally, I wouldn't
trust syslog but I'm not sure of a good alternative. I'll go bother the GLibc
people.
Thank you,
Steven Stewart-Gallus
P.S.
I
