> On 09/29/2015 12:41 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 01:38:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> >>On 09/28/2015 02:15 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The below patch skips gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c if the target keeps null
> >>> pointer checks.
> >>>
>
On 09/29/2015 12:41 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 01:38:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
On 09/28/2015 02:15 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
Hi,
The below patch skips gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c if the target keeps null
pointer checks.
The test fails for such targe
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 01:38:18PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/28/2015 02:15 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> > The below patch skips gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c if the target keeps null
> > pointer checks.
> >
> > The test fails for such targets (avr, in my case) because the addre
On 09/28/2015 02:15 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj wrote:
Hi,
The below patch skips gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c if the target keeps null
pointer checks.
The test fails for such targets (avr, in my case) because the address
comparison in the below code does not resolve to a constant, causing
On Sep 28, 2015, at 1:15 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
wrote:
> The below patch skips gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c if the target keeps null
> pointer checks.
>
> The test fails for such targets (avr, in my case) because the address
> comparison in the below code does not resolve to a constant, causing
Hi,
The below patch skips gcc.dg/addr_equal-1.c if the target keeps null
pointer checks.
The test fails for such targets (avr, in my case) because the address
comparison in the below code does not resolve to a constant, causing
builtin_constant_p to return false and fail the test.
/*