On 10/08/2015 01:35 AM, Christian Bruel wrote:
On 10/07/2015 11:05 PM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 10/07/2015 01:39 AM, Christian Bruel wrote:
A regression test to check -fno-align-functions -O2 -mthumb
thanks
align4.patch
2015-09-29 Christian Bruel<christian.br...@st.com>
PR target/67880
* gcc.target/arm/no-align.c: Likewise.
If this currently passes, then it's fine for the trunk.
If it needs your patch for 67745, then include it as part of the work
to fix
67745.
To my mind this really reads like a dup of PR67745.
Partially yes. I opened a different tracker because this test failed for
a long time even without the use of attributes. It is fixed by the
common subpatch (pr67745 1/2) and does not need (pr67745 2/2).
Never mind, the important thing is that it's been in the testsuite for
tracking. I'll can go together after PR67745 patches if it's OK.
Yea, let's bundle it in the 67745 patches.
jeff
