On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 06:48:55PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 03:32:31PM +0000, Jeff Law wrote:
> > On 10/21/14 14:26, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > >This tweaks a few tests so that we don't have to skip them. This is
> > >mostly concerned with declaring main properly, or changing other
> > >declarations where the test does not seem to rely on the type mismatches.
> > >
> > >I've also included one example of changing a function name to not be
> > >"call", ptxas seems to have a bug that makes it not allow this function
> > >name. If that doesn't seem too awful I'll have a few more tests to fix
> > >up in this way.
> > >
> > >There'll be a 7th patch, not because I can't count, but because I didn't
> > >follow a consistent naming scheme for the patches.
> > >
> > >
> > >Bernd
> > >
> > >
> > >ts-tweaks.diff
> > >
> > >
> > > * gcc.c-torture/compile/920625-2.c: Add return type to
> > > freeReturnStruct.
> > > * gcc.c-torture/execute/20091229-1.c: Declare main properly.
> > > * gcc.c-torture/execute/pr61375.c: Likewise.
> > > * gcc.c-torture/execute/20111208-1.c: Use __SIZE_TYPE__ for size_t.
> > > * gcc.dg/pr30904.c: Remove extern from declaration of t.
> > > * gcc.c-torture/compile/callind.c (bar): Renamed from call.
> > Are any of these obsoleted by Marek's work around gnu11? If not, they're
> > all fine for the trunk.
>
> I think Marek went only for stuff reported as failures in the testsuite.
That's right.
> gcc.c-torture/compile/ defaults to -w I think, supposedly execute/ too,
> so C11 incompatibilities in there might not have been reported.
I can remove the -w and fix C89/C11 incompatibilities, if anyone
thinks it's worth it.
Marek
