On 01/28/2012 02:14 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> testsuite/
> PR testsuite/52011
> * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem.h: New file.
> * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-2_0.c: Include it.
> * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-1_1.c: Same.
> * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-4_1.c: Same.
> * gcc.dg/lto/trans-mem-
On 01/28/2012 03:11 AM, Patrick Marlier wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 11:02 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>> If you all agree to remove ITM_REGPARM from libitm.h, then the tests on
>> x86-32 will work. What is the status of this-- was there agreement on
>> removing regparm?
>
> Note that I meant only for _I
On 01/27/2012 11:02 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
If you all agree to remove ITM_REGPARM from libitm.h, then the tests on
x86-32 will work. What is the status of this-- was there agreement on
removing regparm?
Note that I meant only for _ITM_beginTransaction. Indeed, regparm is
ignored with varia
On 01/27/12 10:00, Patrick Marlier wrote:
On 01/27/2012 10:14 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
+ITM_REGPARM noinline uint32_t _ITM_beginTransaction(uint32_t a, ...)
{ asm(""); }
No ITM_REGPARM here. It should be also removed from libitm.h.
--
Patrick.
I'm ok either way. I'm just trying to get 32
On 01/27/2012 10:14 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
+ITM_REGPARM noinline uint32_t _ITM_beginTransaction(uint32_t a, ...) {
asm(""); }
No ITM_REGPARM here. It should be also removed from libitm.h.
--
Patrick.
The LTO/TM tests are failing with a type mismatch on x86-32 because of
the missing regparm on the prototype.
I have added the regparm, and abstracted things a bit so we don't have
to keep multiple copies. It's bad enough that we have to reproduce this
once...
OK?
testsuite/
PR tests
