http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com 2012-01-23
01:48:59 UTC ---
Has this bug been resolved?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com 2011-11-25
13:35:19 UTC ---
Author: amacleod
Date: Fri Nov 25 13:35:13 2011
New Revision: 181721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=181721
Log:
2011-11-24 Andrew
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-18 13:24:22 UTC ---
On 17-Nov-11, at 4:49 PM, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
Created attachment 25846
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25846
potential second patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com 2011-11-17
21:49:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 25846
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25846
potential second patch
What I dont get is why HP PARISC doesn't have this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #9 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-17 22:56:41 UTC ---
On 11/17/2011 4:49 PM, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Macleodamacleod at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com 2011-11-16
19:03:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 25840
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25840
potential fix
rth has finished the libgcc changes required for supplying
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #7 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-17 01:23:53 UTC ---
On 16-Nov-11, at 2:03 PM, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
Please try a new run with a recent checkout and see what fails. I'm
assuming
that atomic-noinline.c will
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-08 14:56:44 UTC ---
On 11/7/2011 10:18 PM, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
Yeah, it looks like I'll have to change the built-in mechanism slightly. I
followed the __sync methodology, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-07 20:03:43 UTC ---
On 11/7/2011 2:27 PM, amacleod at redhat dot com wrote:
Is dejagnu on hpux limited somehow
That's not the problem.
The problem is the atomic functions are not being
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-11-08 00:10:53 UTC ---
On 7-Nov-11, at 3:03 PM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
The problem is the atomic functions are not being typed correctly:
/usr/ccs/bin/ld: Unsatisfied symbols:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51011
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Macleod amacleod at redhat dot com 2011-11-08
03:18:36 UTC ---
Yeah, it looks like I'll have to change the built-in mechanism slightly. I
followed the __sync methodology, but they dont resolve to function calls unless
13 matches
Mail list logo
