On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 09:27:21AM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> > No, check_vect () has to preceed all the vector statements in main, or
> > often even better if main contains just check_vect () call and call to
> > some other noinline routine that has the vector stuff in it.
> > Otherwise, the t
Hi,
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 12:52:03, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:49:06PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this might be almost obvious?
>
> No, check_vect () has to preceed all the vector statements in main, or
> often even better if main contains just check_vect () c
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:49:06PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this might be almost obvious?
No, check_vect () has to preceed all the vector statements in main, or
often even better if main contains just check_vect () call and call to
some other noinline routine that has the vector stu
Hi,
this might be almost obvious?
Thanks
Bernd.
> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 12:13:53 +0100
>
> Hello,
>
> there is another test case, that misses the necessary check_vect() runtime
> check.
>
> Tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
> OK for trunk?
>
> Regards
> Bernd.