This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR target/48055; FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memcpy-chk.c compilation, -O2 -flto
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:48:48PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > Are you sure? ?Making the vars static enables folding the zero initialization.
>
> I was looking at other similar testcases (snprintf-chk.c,
> vsprintf-chk.c), where uninitialized buffer is declared as static (and
> it didn't fail lto tests). Anyway, let's ask the author of the test
> (CC'd).
The tests weren't written with LTO in mind, after all LTO wasn't supported
by GCC at that point. But I agree with Richard, we shouldn't working around
buggy ld in the gcc testsuite, it is good to know that you have a buggy
linker...
Jakub
- References:
- [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR target/48055; FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memcpy-chk.c compilation, -O2 -flto
- Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR target/48055; FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memcpy-chk.c compilation, -O2 -flto
- Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR target/48055; FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memcpy-chk.c compilation, -O2 -flto
- Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR target/48055; FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memcpy-chk.c compilation, -O2 -flto
- Re: [PATCH, testsuite]: Fix PR target/48055; FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/memcpy-chk.c compilation, -O2 -flto