This is the patch I committed. Should fix everyone's issues.
Fix mcount test cases to only run on supported targets
* gcc.dg/pg-override.c: Only run on x86 Linux.
* gcc.dg/pg.c: Dito.
* gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c: Exclude for PIC.
*
On darwin I get
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c (test for excess errors)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c scan-assembler-not __fentry__
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fentry.c (test for excess errors)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/fentry.c scan-assembler __fentry__
with -m32. The
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:42:37PM +0200, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
On darwin I get
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c (test for excess errors)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c scan-assembler-not __fentry__
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fentry.c (test for excess errors)
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:32:21PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:42:37PM +0200, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
On darwin I get
FAIL: gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c (test for excess errors)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.target/i386/fentry-override.c scan-assembler-not __fentry__
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:39:00PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
Ok, this should fix it:
I'll commit it as obvious after testing unless there are objections.
This isn't sufficient.
If -mfentry isn't compatible with -m32 -fpic, supposedly you need
something like (untested):
/* { dg-do compile {
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:51:33PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:39:00PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
Ok, this should fix it:
I'll commit it as obvious after testing unless there are objections.
This isn't sufficient.
If -mfentry isn't compatible with -m32 -fpic,
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 05:46:45PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:51:33PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:39:00PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
Ok, this should fix it:
I'll commit it as obvious after testing unless there are objections.
This
Well, so why does
Yo're right. It's actually not supported. I'll use the method you
suggested earlier.
-Andi
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:29:50AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
From: Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com
Test fentry and no_instrument_function
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:36 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:29:50AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
From: Andi Kleen
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
From: Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com
Test fentry and no_instrument_function overriding.
No test cases for the LTO test for now, as the LTO
harness doesn't seem to support different flags for the final
link.
Sure it
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:29:50AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Andi Kleen a...@firstfloor.org wrote:
From: Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com
Test fentry and no_instrument_function overriding.
No test cases for the LTO test for now, as the LTO
harness
From: Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com
Test fentry and no_instrument_function overriding.
No test cases for the LTO test for now, as the LTO
harness doesn't seem to support different flags for the final
link.
gcc/testsuite/:
2014-09-11 Andi Kleen a...@linux.intel.com
*
13 matches
Mail list logo
