------- Comment #9 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2008-08-21 19:04 ------- (In reply to comment #7) > Patch did not fix any those regressions for the AVR: > > FAIL: gcc.dg/attr-weakref-1.c (test for excess errors) > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-1.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?j > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-12.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?foo > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-2.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1a > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-2.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1b > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-2.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1c > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-2.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1e > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-3.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1a > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-3.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1b > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-3.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1c > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-3.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?ffoo1e > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-4.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1a > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-4.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1b > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-4.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1c > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-5.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1a > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-5.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1b > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-5.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1c > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-5.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1i > FAIL: gcc.dg/weak/weak-5.c scan-assembler weak[^ \t]*[ \t]_?vfoo1j >
Ok, patched correctly, and verified that the patch does NOT fix the above regressions. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37170