On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 15:30 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 18:19 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 09:44:42AM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 09:10 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2009-10-0
On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 18:56 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 03:34:30PM -0700, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> >
> > Why do we have a libstdc++ list? For questions like this...
> >
> Because this is a flaw in the libstdc++-v3 testsuite harness
> which obviously the core gcc testsui
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 19:19 +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> I've recently looked into what it takes to support decimal float on
> additional platforms (like Solaris, IRIX, and Tru64 UNIX in my case).
> I've found no documentation, and while I could figure out some things
> myself, I'd like to get some
On Wed, 2009-12-09 at 09:56 -0800, Walter Landry wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The FTensor library referenced at
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/testing/testing-ftensor.html
>
> has moved. The new location is
>
> http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~walter/FTensor/index.html
>
> Cheers,
> Walter Landry
> wlan...@cal
On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 10:24 -0600, Roman Kononov wrote:
> #g++ --version | head -1
> g++ (GCC) 4.4.3 20091228 (prerelease)
> #cat test.cc
> typedef _Decimal32 my_type;
> #gcc -c test.cc
> #g++ -c test.cc
> test.cc:1: error: '_Decimal32' does not name a type
>
> G++ is unfamiliar with the _DecimalX
On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 19:05 -0800, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> > Some of the support for those
> > classes is in current trunk, but a crucial change to the compiler to
> > allow binary compatibility between those classes and the C builtin
> > types wasn't approved before the 4.5 feature cutoff (see
>
On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 12:47 +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks Janis for your complete summary of the current status.
> > Instead of dec32/64/128 you could use _Decimal32/64/128, but the C++
> > TR requires that float.h define those symbols as typedefs to the
> > classes so you'd run int
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 21:17 +0100, Christoph Rupp wrote:
> 2010/2/20 Richard Guenther :
> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Christoph Rupp wrote:
> [...]
> >> I fixed all warnings regarding dereferencing type-punned pointers and
> >> I compile with -O3 AND -fno-strict-aliasing.
> >>
> >> and i st
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 13:11 -0800, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
> > If you can reproduce the problem with a small, self-contained test then
> > please file a bug report. It might be possible to issue a warning or
> > to detect
On Sat, 2010-03-06 at 11:44 +, Peter Maier wrote:
> The gcc developers seem to have nice tool referred to as "Phil's regression
> hunter". Where can I find documentation on it? I'm interested to know how it
> works and its abilities. Is it maybe even available for download?
>
> - Peter
Long
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There are a number of failures in my latest run
> of sparc-rtems4.10 but the ones I have gone back
> and run the executable by hand actually pass.
> I have no idea why this is happening and wondered
> if someone had some insight as t
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
> On 03/23/2010 03:01 PM, Janis Johnson wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Joel Sherrill
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There are a number of failures in my
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:43:39AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> > I have run the testcase with the early inliner disabled and noticed
>> > that gcc.dg/guality/inline-params.c XPASSes with early inlining and
>> > XFAILs without it. Th
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:14:16AM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:43:39AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> >>
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 20:07 +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> I would like to commit the following testcase to ensure we do not
> regress for PR 12603.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
> 2008-10-20 Manuel López-Ibáñez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> PR 12603
> * gcc.dg/pr12603.c: New testcase.
OK.
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 18:00 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> In scanasm.exp we do this:
>
> proc scan-assembler { args } {
> upvar 2 name testcase
> set output_file "[file rootname [file tail $testcase]].s"
>
>
> However, in dejagnu, $name may have compiler switches appended to it:
>
> #
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 19:12 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > I thought something like that was already done but I couldn't find it
> > right now. Is it a problem? If so, we should certainly do this.
>
> I see it done in other places, but not scanasm. How's this?
>
> 2008-10-23 DJ Delorie <[EMAIL
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 22:01 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > OK, after you've run the testsuite with this change. The ChangeLog
> > entry should show the names of all of the procs you changed.
>
> Is gcc.target/i386.exp enough? I originally found it with
> xstormy16-elf on an older branch, but xstor
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 08:59 -0500, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Doug,
>Is there a reason why prune.exp is loaded in lib/gcc.exp and lib/g++.exp
> but never actually used? I need to prune a linker warning with..
>
> regsub -all "(^|\n)ld: warning: can't make compact unwind encoding from dwarf
> for \
I'm rewriting function interpret_float_suffix in libcpp/expr.c to fix
suffixes in decimal float literal constants for c/33466. While I'm at
it I'm fixing suffixes for fixed-point literal constants. Currently for
fixed-point GCC accepts any ordering of the letters in the suffix. The
technical rep
On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 10:42 -0800, Fu, Chao-Ying wrote:
> Janis Johnson wrote:
> >
> > I'm rewriting function interpret_float_suffix in libcpp/expr.c to fix
> > suffixes in decimal float literal constants for c/33466. While I'm at
> > it I'm fixing
On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 22:47 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Janis Johnson wrote:
>
> > I'm rewriting function interpret_float_suffix in libcpp/expr.c to fix
> > suffixes in decimal float literal constants for c/33466. While I'm at
> > it I
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:28 -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:03:51AM -0800, Anthony Newnam wrote:
> > Thanks Joe.
> >
> > As far as I know the problem I'm seeing isn't a regression but perhaps
> > this script could still be useful. I don't really understand how it is
> > suppose
On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 10:09 -0800, Janis Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:28 -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:03:51AM -0800, Anthony Newnam wrote:
> > > Thanks Joe.
> > >
> > > As far as I know the problem I'm seeing isn
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 17:04 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Status
> ==
>
> The trunk is still in stage 4 which means it is open under the usual
> release branch rules. Thus the trunk is open for regression and
> documentation fixes only.
What do you think about possibly-disruptive testsuit
On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 20:14 +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Toon Moene wrote on Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 07:46:37PM CET:
> > Richard Guenther wrote:
> >>
> >> Note that merging the branch will be painful (as in, please dissect
> >> the branch into the individual patches again to make bisecting the
>
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 13:53 -0700, Neil Vachharajani wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm working on a patch which makes FDO profile data more robust to
> source changes. Before I sent the patch to the list for review, I was
> wondering how to write a test for this situation. In particular, what
> I would li
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 23:21 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Kaveh R. Ghazi
> wrote:
> > From: "Richard Guenther"
> >
> >> I tested on openSUSE Factory which currently has gcc 4.3.3, gmp 4.2.3,
> >> mpfr 2.4.1 and some pre-2.10 glibc.
> >
> > I tried with vanilla
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 19:40 +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Nordvall, Gary USNUNK NAVAIR 33, ,
> LEGACY SERVER wrote:
> > GNU,
> >
> > Is there an end-of-support date for GCC version 4.3.0? I'm assisting a
> > customer here at NAWCWD China Lake, California, to re
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 12:32 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Thanks, this leaves out:
>
> r145593: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00545.html (i386)
> r145594: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-03/msg00545.html (s390)
> r145597, r145598, r145599:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 20:34 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> SH (and I'm sure others) has some multilibs (like -m2a-single-only)
> where sizeof(double) is 4, which breaks some testcases. Here's a
> patch which adds checks for small doubles (and small long doubles),
> and adjusts some of the tests which
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 17:10 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> In gcc.dg/Wconversion-real.c we see this:
>
> vdouble = 3.1L; /* { dg-warning "conversion" "" { target large_long_double
> } } */
>
> It turns out check_effective_target_large_long_double is NEVER called.
> You can change it to some bogus
On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 19:07 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > I'm convinced that if check_effective_target_xxx exists then it is
> > called and the test directive works as intended.
>
> Hmmm... how did you prove this? I tried putting verbose in them,
> nothing printed. I tried reversing them, no chan
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 08:56 -0500, Tom Browder wrote:
> Attached is a shortened test report with the following lines removed:
>
> XFAIL
> PASS
> UNSUPPORTED
The preferred way to post test results is by running the script
$SRC/contrib/test_summary from within the build directory. It
produces a su
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 11:56 -0400, David Fang wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Tom Browder wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 18:28, Janis Johnson wrote:
> >> ...
> >>> The preferred way to post test results is by running the script
> >&g
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
> --disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use --disable-shared, I
> get this:
>
> /home/iant/gnu/ppl-0.10.2-install/lib/libppl_c.a(ppl_c_implementation_common.o):
> In
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 18:46 +0200, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> Janis Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:07 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> >> Another Graphite build issue: it appears that I must not use
> >> --disable-shared when I configure PPL. If I do use -
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 10:45 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On the LTO branch, I am brute-forcing LTO compilation on all the
> testsuite directories. This causes many spurious failures because we
> are not going to support LTO compiles on everything. For instance,
> LTO is not supported for fortran
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 10:28 +1000, Ben Elliston wrote:
> Hi Ian
>
> In the last couple of days, I have started seeing the following warnings
> when building target-libiberty:
>
> /home/bje/source/gcc-clean/libiberty/cp-demangle.c:723: warning: logical
> ‘and’ of mutually exclusive tests is alway
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 11:14 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 07:59:15PM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> > Excess errors:
> > /pfeifer/OBJ-0531-2252/i386-unknown-freebsd7.1/./libgomp/.libs/libgomp.so:
> > undefined reference to `pthread_create'
> >
> > And what all of these
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 10:37 -0400, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 12:09:57AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > 2009/5/20 Aldy Hernandez:
> > >>
> > >> My only worry is that the testsuite may confuse column and line
> > >> numbers and pass/fail tests because of it.
> > >
> > > Janis
On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 14:22 +0200, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> I (Basile) very probably misunderstood what Joseph Myers or Richard
> Guenther meant. What I might have [mis]understood scares me. This is a
> request for clarification.
> Did I understood that in your view no branch hosted on GCC
I'm investigating support for decimal floating-point arithmetic in G++.
GCC currently supports this functionality in C for several targets based
on ISO/IEC TR 24732. The C support adds 3 new scalar types: _Decimal32,
_Decimal64, and _Decimal128. With support for mangling those types and
defining
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:47:09PM -0800, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> I would like to get regular LAPACK regression testing and automatic
> reporting set up.
>
> Is there a gcc.gnu server somewhere that I can get access to to set this up
> and have it run once daily?
>
> This is mostly to catch gfor
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 08:54:49PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I've been testing gcc-4.1 RC1 on x86-linux-gnu with SPEC CPU 2000.
Have you verfied that you can build and run all of the tests without
profile-directed optimizations? Several of these programs require
special options to com
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 11:52:26AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> My suggestion is that features that are clearly experimental (like this
> one) should be (a) documented as such, and (b) should generate a
> warning, like:
>
> warning: -ftree-loop-linear is an experimental feature and is not
> rec
On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 02:53:37PM -0700, Dale Johannesen wrote:
> >So from my point of view, the situation with -ftree-loop-linear is
> >fine - it's ICEing after all, not producing silently wrong-code. For
> >experimental options (where
> >I would include all options not enabled by -O[123s]) know
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 05:30:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> The C spec for Altivec (not the ISA) is a horrible spec that set a
> horrible de facto standard. To some extent, gcc already departed from
> Altivec, for example by disallowing the (vector int) (1, 2, 3, 4) syntax
> -- notice t
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 05:53:30PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Janis Johnson writes:
> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 05:30:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > >
> > > The C spec for Altivec (not the ISA) is a horrible spec that set a
> > > horrible de
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 08:49:48PM -0700, HeroreV wrote:
> The pages at http://www.gnu.org/software/gcc/ are
> several months old, even though the page at
> http://gcc.gnu.org/about.html says:
I forwarded this mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Janis
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 03:08:52PM +0300, Nikolaos Kavvadias wrote:
> is basic block profiling being dropped out from recent GCCs (i mean
> compiling with "-g -pg -a")?
> If it is still supported in any of the GCC development branches please
> let me know.
Support for -a was dropped in GCC 3.1 Ba
ay behind.
Creating the page is easy, keeping up with build reports and test
results can become time-consuming if you get behind.
If you're interested, send me private e-mail and I'll tell you what's
involved and we can talk to Gerald, the web pages maintainer.
Janis Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Support in GCC 4.2 for decimal floating types is based on drafts of
ISO/IEC WDTR 23732, which continues to change. There are some
differences between the most recent draft N1176 and what GCC implements,
and some other things that should probably change or at least be
documented. I'd appreciate so
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 10:48:50PM +0200, FX Coudert wrote:
> I'd like to include cases in the gfortran testsuite to check that we
> correctly issue a run-time error, and exit with non-zero code.
>
> I have the following example:
>
> $ cat runtime_error.f90
> ! { dg-do run }
> ! { dg-options "-f
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 04:31:31PM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote:
> I've started adding a bunch of regression tests to the
> Ada dejagnu testsuite (see below for the current state).
> I've accumulated these over several years, and almost all
> of them have been reported in gcc bugzilla (not many of
> t
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:34:16AM +, Kapil Dhawan wrote:
> >From: Mike Stump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Kapil Dhawan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> >Subject: Re: Increment Operator
> >Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 10:00:34 -0700
> >
> >On Aug 7, 2006, at 2:31 AM, Kapil Dhawan wrote:
> >>
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 06:30:26PM +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Wtraditional warns for "Conversions by prototypes between
> fixed/floating point values and vice versa. The absence
> of these prototypes when compiling with traditional C would cause
> serious prob
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 12:45:55PM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 06:30:26PM +0100, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> > 3) The above question may not have a sensible answer. It may be either
> > because decimal float "is a GCC extensions and thus not relevant
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:21:08PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Dave,
> I noticed this in the gcc/libmudflap/ChangeLog...
>
> * testsuite/lib/libmudflap.exp (libmudflap-init): Add extra libraries.
> (prune_gcc_output): Add glibc static linking warnings.
>
> which makes me thin
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:02:25PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Mike,
>I just created PR28837 with the patch to prune.exp that
> prunes the ld64 warnings. I have only tested this with the
> core gcc at the moment because I can't get...
>
> make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_board "unix{,-m64
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 11:51:54AM -0400, Kate Minola wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I like to test the weekly snapshots of the active development
> branch against code that I am particularly interested in.
>
> I realize that snapshots are just that - and so do not
> worry unless I see the same failure a coupl
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:44:56AM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
> > Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Eric Christopher wrote:
> > >
> > > > So, these are xfailed, but still produce quite a bit of noise on both
> > > > x86_64-darwin
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:44:56AM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
> > Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > > On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Eric Christopher wrote:
> > >
> > > > So, these are xfailed, but still produce quite a bit of noise on both
> > > > x86_64-darwin
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:49:51PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Is it possible to combine different options together when
> running the testsuite? For example I can run...
>
> make check-objc RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=unix/-fgnu-runtime"
>
> and
>
> make check-objc RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 10:40:47PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote:
> however this doesn't manage to detect when '-m64'
> is being used in the compile flags. Does anyone have
> any hints on how to change...
>
> +[regexp ".*-m64.*" "$(options)"] } {
>
> to properly catch the instances when -m64
The deadline for submitting proposals for the GCC & GNU Toolchain
Developers' Summit is March 1 (http:www.gccsummit.org). Besides
thinking about submitting a proposal yourself, consider what you'd
like to hear about or discuss at the Summit and encourage others to
submit proposals to cover those a
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 11:46:20AM +0100, Volker Reichelt wrote:
> Regressions that cause ICE's on invalid code often go unnoticed in the
> testsuite, since regular errors and ICE's both match { dg-error "" }.
> See for example g++.dg/parse/error16.C which ICE's since yesterday,
> but the testsuite
On 07/22/2013 02:59 AM, Vidya Praveen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There are 42 test files (25 under gcc.dg) that specifies
>
> { dg-add-options bind_pic_locally }
>
> in the regression testsuite. The procedure add_options_for_bind_pic_locally
> from lib/target-supports.exp adds -fPIE or -fpie when -fPIC
On 08/13/2013 04:06 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I noticed something strange in the libgomp testresults (but not
> necessarily specific to libgomp): an "arbitrary" set of the Fortran
> execution tests are run just for -O, and others for each of the full set
> of torture options: -O0, -O1,
On 08/27/2013 06:52 AM, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
> On 23 July 2013 17:40, Janis Johnson wrote:
>> On 07/22/2013 02:59 AM, Vidya Praveen wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> There are 42 test files (25 under gcc.dg) that specifies
>>>
>>> { dg-add-options
On 01/27/2014 10:51 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> This is on trunk - I was under the impression that it is always trunk,
> unless otherwise stated?
>
> getpid doesn't really make sense for bare metal targets, I would think?
>
> Regards
> Senthil
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 01:04:48PM +
I'd like to eliminate duplicate messages in test summary files. Some of
these are from tests that check for multiple error or warning messages
on the same line of source code, some are from misused torture options,
and some are from scans that don't report torture options. All of the
ones I've fo
On 06/18/2012 10:51 PM, Franz Fehringer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am investigating the possibilities of using decimal floating point
> arithmetic with gcc (on Linux / x86_64 to be explicit).
I'm a little rusty on this and my information might be out of date, but
this should be a good start. If I say so
On 08/09/2012 10:52 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What is the recommended way to skip specific (non target specific) testcases
> for a subtargets?
>
> There are a bunch of tests in the gcc testsuite that are too big (in
> terms of code size or memory) for a subtarget of the avr
On 08/11/2012 09:18 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 09:54:17AM -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
>> On 08/09/2012 10:52 PM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> What is the recommended way to skip specific (non target specif
On 10/04/2012 07:06 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
>> Some tests in gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/avr/torture (builtins-2.c, for
>> e.g.) have -Tavr51-flash1.x specified in dg-options. The tests currently
>> fail with an unable to open linker script error for that file.
>>
>
On 10/16/2012 07:14 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) writes:
>
>> These questions are motivated by the comments #4 to #15 of pr54407.
>>
>> The bottom line is that
>>
>> { dg-do compile targets1 }
>> { dg-do run targets2 }
>>
>> behaves as
>>
>> {dg-do run { tar
On 10/16/2012 03:31 PM, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
> Thanks for the quick answer.
>
>> That's just the way it works, so I suppose you could call it a feature.
>
> So the answer to (1) is yes and to (2) it is a poorly documented feature.
> May be the restriction to one dg-do directive should be ad
Occasionally I try to run GCC tests using flags for which I don't have
the required target platform, or even compatible libraries. I usually
hack up several test files to kind of get what I want, but it's a pain.
Right now, for example, I'm trying to run upstream gcc.target/arm tests
for several s
?
Janis
Index: dummy-link.exp
===
--- dummy-link.exp (revision 0)
+++ dummy-link.exp (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+
+#
+# File: dummy-link.exp
+# Author: Jani
PR target/34526 doesn't show up as a regression but it is in that
on powerpc-linux "-O3 -mcpu=970" now includes -ftree-vectorize
and with the default, non-AltiVec ABI vector registers can be
clobbered by other functions in the same call tree. An example
of this is 176.gcc from SPEC CPU2000.
The f
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 15:25 -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 09:29:22AM -0800, Janis Johnson wrote:
> > PR target/34526 doesn't show up as a regression but it is in that
> > on powerpc-linux "-O3 -mcpu=970" now includes -ftree-vectorize
> &g
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 16:12 -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 03:57:10PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 03:25:03PM -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > > What would break if in non-altivec ABI all Altivec registers are either
> > > fixed (-mno-altivec) or
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 17:21 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >>>>> Janis Johnson writes:
>
> Janis> I have a patch, written since this thread started, that saves and
> Janis> restores AltiVec registers based on TARGET_ALTIVEC instead of
> Janis> TARGET_ALT
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 18:58 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> I misread Janis's latest patch that I approved.
>
> The patch was suppose to enable -mabi=altivec when -maltivec is
> enabled, not change the default ABI.
>
> For other OSes, -mabi=altivec is the default, so -maltivec ju
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 01:34 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Janis Johnson wrote:
>
> > There are lots of inconsistencies in passing generic vectors as arguments
> > and return values, and I'll leave those alone until the PowerPC ELF ABI
> > group
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 18:47 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:10:57PM -0800, Janis Johnson wrote:
> > I changed argument passing and function return of generic vectors to be
> > consistent with and without the AltiVec ABI for powerpc-linux and
> > power
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 17:04 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> gcc/testsuite/lib/target-supports.exp checks whether the compiler spits
> out any messages when using -fpic/-fPIC; this doesn't cover the case
> where the compiler happily processes everything, but the linker cannot
> deal with the result (in
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 18:18 -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As I've mentioned last week, I've created branches/gcc-4_3-branch.
> The trunk is now 4.4 stage 1, the branch is open for regression bugfixes
> and documentation fixes only, but additionally all checkings require
> RM approval in ad
On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 10:18 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> /* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-mcpu=405" } { "-mcpu=" } } */
>
> I think this is doing what we want it to. It looks like it results
> the tests getting run when -mcpu=405 and excluded when
> -mcpu=603e is set on the board cflags.
The te
On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 10:21 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 10:18 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> > /* { dg-skip-if "" { *-*-* } { "-mcpu=405" } { "-mcpu=" } } */
> >
> > I think this is doing what we want it to. It look
Parallel bootstrap on powerpc64-linux currently fails with:
In file included
from /home/janis/gcc_trunk_anonsvn/gcc/gcc/genconditions.c:32:
./tm.h:7:22: error: options.h: No such file or directory
echo '[c]' >> tmp-gi.list
echo '/home/janis/gcc_trunk_anonsvn/gcc/gcc/c-lang.c' >> tmp-gi.list
echo '
On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 19:13 -0500, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
>
> HJ asked this in June 2007:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-06/msg00144.html
>
> It seems as if delaying the announcement was what was desired then. Is
> this still the case?
>
> I was just as surprised as HJ was to not find this doc
On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 17:10 -0500, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> Still waiting on this...
How's this?
Index: changes.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.3/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.108
diff -u -r1.108 changes.html
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 16:47 -0500, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> > How's this?
>
> Hey Janis! Sorry, I missed your first email.
>
> This looks great, thanks for your quick response. Can you check this
> in? I filed 35777 about this, so this may fix that PR.
I checked in the change to gcc-4.3/changes.
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 17:30 -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 05:16:23PM -0700, Xiaoxiang Liu wrote:
> > I have a question regarding GCC4 version compatibility? In general,
> > should two versions with same major version number be compatible?
> > Specifically, I want to confirm wheth
On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 06:57 -0400, Andy H wrote:
> There are several test in testsuite that use trampolines that are still
> run with dejagnu switch set to no_trampolines.
>
> Its on my TODO list for AVR target but a recent email reminded me that
> it affects testing of other targets than can'
prefer to find a way to do the
necessary checks outside of the test itself, in a new directive.
If that sounds workable I'll look into it.
Janis
> Janis Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 10:21 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 10:18
On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 17:54 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Not knowing the internal details of the test harness, I
> would make an ignorant guess that the command line
> should be checked before it is executed. If it has multiple
> -mcpu/-march options and they were not all the same, the
> test sh
On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 18:14 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Janis Johnson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 17:54 -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Not knowing the internal details of the test harness, I
> >> would make an ignorant guess that the com
101 - 200 of 242 matches
Mail list logo
