(catching up on old email)
On Jul 8, 2013, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Jonathan Wakely
>>> wrote:
On 7 July 2013 21:33, Gabriel Dos Rei
On 13 August 2013 18:27, Piotr Miłek wrote:
> Hi,
> Can we send me the compiled gcc and gcc for Android Shell (armeabi). I
> would like to have data after uncpack with a minimum size 50 MB. Sory
> my bad English.
This question is off-topic for this mailing list, questions about
using and installin
Viktor Pobedin writes:
> Is there a simple way to convert rtx object to the assemble
> insutruction? Ideally I would like to have function something like:
> const char *rtx2asm(rtx insn);
> returning a string with the asm instruction for the insn.
>
> Closest thing that I found is the final_
On 08/13/2013 04:06 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I noticed something strange in the libgomp testresults (but not
> necessarily specific to libgomp): an "arbitrary" set of the Fortran
> execution tests are run just for -O, and others for each of the full set
> of torture options: -O0, -O1,
Hi,
Can we send me the compiled gcc and gcc for Android Shell (armeabi). I
would like to have data after uncpack with a minimum size 50 MB. Sory
my bad English.
On 13-08-12 11:13 AM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
Hi, Vladimir,
Apparently the issue that David mentioned has already been fixed earlier:
http://gcc.gnu.org/r198344
2013-04-26 Vladimir Makarov
...
* lra-constraints.c (curr_insn_set): New.
...
(process_alt_operands)
Is there a simple way to convert rtx object to the assemble
insutruction? Ideally I would like to have function something like:
const char *rtx2asm(rtx insn);
returning a string with the asm instruction for the insn.
Closest thing that I found is the final_scan_insn function in final.c
but
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 07:46:46 -0700
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:47:37AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Since we really doesn't want to...
>
> Ow. Can't believe I wrote that.
>
All your base are belong to us!
-- Steve
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:47:37AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Since we really doesn't want to...
Ow. Can't believe I wrote that.
-hpa
Hi!
I noticed something strange in the libgomp testresults (but not
necessarily specific to libgomp): an "arbitrary" set of the Fortran
execution tests are run just for -O, and others for each of the full set
of torture options: -O0, -O1, -O2, and so on. After some time I realized
it's the set of
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 10:47:37AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/12/2013 09:09 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>
> >> On the majority of architectures, including x86, you cannot simply copy
> >> a piece of code elsewhere and have it still work.
> >
> > I thought we used -fPIC which would allow
11 matches
Mail list logo