On 10/05/15 23:16, Martin Galvan wrote:
Hi Ramana! Sorry to bother, but I looked at the repository and didn't
see this committed. As I don't have write access could you please
commit this for me?
Thanks a lot!
sorry about the slow response, I was travelling for a bit and missed
your emails. Trying your patch out gives me failures possibly because my
mail client munged it when it received this inline.
Can you please rebase if necessary, test and send it again as an
attachment ?
patch -p1 --dry-run < ~/Downloads/martin-patch.txt
checking file libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S
Hunk #2 FAILED at 57.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 70 with fuzz 2.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 86.
Hunk #5 FAILED at 153.
Hunk #6 FAILED at 418.
Hunk #7 FAILED at 425.
Hunk #8 FAILED at 440.
Hunk #9 FAILED at 462.
Hunk #10 FAILED at 485.
Hunk #11 FAILED at 555.
Hunk #12 FAILED at 566.
Hunk #13 FAILED at 601.
Hunk #14 FAILED at 653.
Hunk #15 FAILED at 720.
Hunk #16 FAILED at 868.
Hunk #17 FAILED at 1057.
Hunk #18 FAILED at 1068.
Hunk #19 FAILED at 1082.
Hunk #20 FAILED at 1090.
Hunk #21 FAILED at 1122.
Hunk #22 FAILED at 1133.
Hunk #23 succeeded at 1145 with fuzz 2.
Hunk #24 FAILED at 1155.
Hunk #25 FAILED at 1168.
Hunk #26 FAILED at 1228.
Hunk #27 succeeded at 1236 with fuzz 2.
Hunk #28 FAILED at 1254.
Hunk #29 succeeded at 1263 with fuzz 2.
Hunk #30 FAILED at 1297.
Hunk #31 succeeded at 1306 with fuzz 2.
Hunk #32 FAILED at 1336.
Hunk #33 succeeded at 1345 with fuzz 2.
Hunk #34 FAILED at 1410.
27 out of 34 hunks FAILED
checking file libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-sf.S
Hunk #1 FAILED at 31.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 294.
Hunk #9 FAILED at 460.
Hunk #10 FAILED at 471.
Hunk #16 FAILED at 845.
Hunk #20 FAILED at 898.
6 out of 27 hunks FAILED
checking file libgcc/config/arm/lib1funcs.S
regards
Ramana
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Martin Galvan
<martin.gal...@tallertechnologies.com> wrote:
Thanks a lot. I don't have write access to the repository, could you
commit this for me?
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan
<ramana....@googlemail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Martin Galvan
<martin.gal...@tallertechnologies.com> wrote:
This patch adds CFI directives to the soft floating point support code for ARM.
Previously, if we tried to do a backtrace from that code in a debug session we'd
get something like this:
(gdb) bt
#0 __nedf2 () at
../../../../../../gcc-4.9.2/libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S:1082
#1 0x00000db6 in __aeabi_cdcmple () at
../../../../../../gcc-4.9.2/libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S:1158
#2 0xf5c28f5c in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?)
Now we'll get something like this:
(gdb) bt
#0 __nedf2 () at
../../../../../../gcc-4.9.2/libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S:1156
#1 0x00000db6 in __aeabi_cdcmple () at
../../../../../../gcc-4.9.2/libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S:1263
#2 0x00000dc8 in __aeabi_dcmpeq () at
../../../../../../gcc-4.9.2/libgcc/config/arm/ieee754-df.S:1285
#3 0x00000504 in main ()
I have a company-wide copyright assignment. I don't have commit access, though,
so it would be great if anyone could commit this for me.
Thanks a lot!
this is OK , thanks. Sorry about the delay in reviewing this.
Ramana
