This is the mail archive of the
gcc-regression@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC build failed for powerpc-eabisim with your patch on 2002-06-13T18:40:10Z.
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: gcc-regression at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: akim at epita dot fr, gdr at codesourcery dot com, jh at suse dot cz, roger at eyesopen dot com, tromey at redhat dot com, uweigand at de dot ibm dot com
- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:56:05 -0600
- Subject: Re: GCC build failed for powerpc-eabisim with your patch on 2002-06-13T18:40:10Z.
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <200206132159.g5DLxgC17909@maat.sfbay.redhat.com>, "GCC regression
checker" writes:
> There were also 9 new regression test failures, and 15
> failures that existed before and after that patch; 0 failures
> have been fixed.
>
> The new failures are:
> mips-elf g++.sum g++.other/reload1.C
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/compile/20020106-1.c,
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/compile/950612-1.c,
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/20011126-1.c
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/20020506-1.c
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/950607-2.c
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/950704-1.c
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/execute/tstdi-1.c
> mips-elf gcc.sum gcc.c-torture/unsorted/cc.c,
Wow. At least some of these are due to Roger's change, not my shared
RTL changes.
For at least the 950612, the code appears to still be valid, but it trips
an assembler warning. I'm in the process of verifying whether or not the
other regressions are of a similar nature.
jeff