Re: [ptx] Fix sso tests

Hi! On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 15:16:12 -0500, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > The gcc.dg/sso tests gratuitously fail on PTX because they use IO facilities > that don't exist there. This patch changes the dumping to use the putchar > function call (and not a macro), and not use fputs. >

Re: [ptx] Fix sso tests

On 11/24/15 00:01, Jeff Law wrote: On 11/23/2015 01:54 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: On 11/23/15 15:41, Jeff Law wrote: In the 'put' function, why not just make all targets go through putchar? It's not like this is performance critical code and I don't think it compromises any of the tests,

[ptx] Fix sso tests

The gcc.dg/sso tests gratuitously fail on PTX because they use IO facilities that don't exist there. This patch changes the dumping to use the putchar function call (and not a macro), and not use fputs. With this they all pass. I'm not quite sure where the maintainer boundaries lie for

Re: [ptx] Fix sso tests

On 11/23/2015 01:54 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: On 11/23/15 15:41, Jeff Law wrote: In the 'put' function, why not just make all targets go through putchar? It's not like this is performance critical code and I don't think it compromises any of the tests, does it? I contemplated that, but

Re: [ptx] Fix sso tests

On 11/23/15 15:41, Jeff Law wrote: In the 'put' function, why not just make all targets go through putchar? It's not like this is performance critical code and I don't think it compromises any of the tests, does it? I contemplated that, but wondered if someone would complain. I'm happy

Re: [ptx] Fix sso tests

On 11/23/2015 01:16 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: The gcc.dg/sso tests gratuitously fail on PTX because they use IO facilities that don't exist there. This patch changes the dumping to use the putchar function call (and not a macro), and not use fputs. With this they all pass. I'm not quite sure