Thanks for the review.
See explanations and questions below.
Le 2024-12-05 à 17 h 03, Andrew Pinski a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 1:46 PM Antoni Boucher wrote:
Hi.
This is a patch for the bug 117886.
I ran the jit tests on x86-64 and there are as much failures as on the
master branch (4).
On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 2:13 PM Antoni Boucher wrote:
>
> Thanks for the review.
> See explanations and questions below.
>
> Le 2024-12-05 à 17 h 03, Andrew Pinski a écrit :
> > On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 1:46 PM Antoni Boucher wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi.
> >> This is a patch for the bug 117886.
> >> I ran t
On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 1:46 PM Antoni Boucher wrote:
>
> Hi.
> This is a patch for the bug 117886.
> I ran the jit tests on x86-64 and there are as much failures as on the
> master branch (4).
> I also ran the jit tests on Aarch64 with another patch and there are
> much less failures.
> Iains ran
Hi.
This is a patch for the bug 117923.
I'd like to know if there's a simpler fix for this.
I tried keeping all the fields in the same struct and annotating the
scalar fields as in:
enum GTY((skip)) machine_mode mode;
but it didn't fix the issue.
Any other ideas?
The following test suites pas
Hi.
This is a patch for the bug 117886.
I ran the jit tests on x86-64 and there are as much failures as on the
master branch (4).
I also ran the jit tests on Aarch64 with another patch and there are
much less failures.
Iains ran the tests with this patch on Darwin and this fixes the
failures of
