Re: [PATCH v2] mips: Fix overaligned function arguments [PR109435]

2023-06-29 Thread Jovan Dmitrovic
> Ohh, my fault: the `-flto` option should always be skipped, when run test. Right, if tests run with `-flto` option, they will fail. However, I do believe they are run only if LTO support is enabled, that's why my tests all passed without explicitly skipping that option. Your modification looks

Re: [PATCH v2] mips: Fix overaligned function arguments [PR109435]

2023-06-29 Thread YunQiang Su via Gcc-patches
YunQiang Su 于2023年6月29日周四 14:04写道: > > Jovan Dmitrovic 于2023年6月27日周二 16:54写道: > > > > Hi, > > I am sending a revised patch, now with different tests for N64/N32 and O32 > > ABIs. > > For the O32 ABI, I've skipped the -O0 and -Os pipelines, considering there > > is a > > difference between exact

Re: [PATCH v2] mips: Fix overaligned function arguments [PR109435]

2023-06-28 Thread YunQiang Su via Gcc-patches
Jovan Dmitrovic 于2023年6月27日周二 16:54写道: > > Hi, > I am sending a revised patch, now with different tests for N64/N32 and O32 > ABIs. > For the O32 ABI, I've skipped the -O0 and -Os pipelines, considering there is > a > difference between exact offsets for store instructions (the registers used >

Re: [PATCH v2] mips: Fix overaligned function arguments [PR109435]

2023-06-27 Thread Jovan Dmitrovic
Hi, I am sending a revised patch, now with different tests for N64/N32 and O32 ABIs. For the O32 ABI, I've skipped the -O0 and -Os pipelines, considering there is a difference between exact offsets for store instructions (the registers used remain the same). Skipping -flto isn't really necessary,