This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: regress and -m64
- From: howarth at bromo dot msbb dot uc dot edu (Jack Howarth)
- To: howarth at bromo dot msbb dot uc dot edu, lucier at math dot purdue dot edu
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 15:35:11 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: regress and -m64
I was confusing your use of -mcpu=970 in the make check with the
build flags...sorry. You might stop using that flag for now until
you get a baseline of how many additional failures seen in -m64
compared to -m32 are not due to the linker warnings (after you
apply the TImode patch). I'll look at my last make check when I
get home tonight but I don't think you should see more than an
additional 20 failures for g++ and an additional 4 failures for
libstdc++. The bulk of the failures are seeing must be either due
to 1) the use of -mcpu=970, 2) the absence of the TImode patch or
2) not pruning the linker warnings.
ps I would first try retesting your current build without -mcpu=970
and then rebuild with the TImode patch and test again without
-mcpu=970. Then you can patch the prune.exp and test a third time.
This should give you how many failures are due to each cause.