https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #17 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Aug 29 21:06:21 2017
New Revision: 251437
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251437=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-07-13 Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #15 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Jul 19 22:05:20 2017
New Revision: 250371
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250371=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-07-19 Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #14 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Jul 19 20:31:53 2017
New Revision: 250368
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250368=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-07-19 Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #13 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Jul 12 23:07:50 2017
New Revision: 250165
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250165=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-07-12 Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #12 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 41721
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41721=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #11 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Jun 28 13:07:12 2017
New Revision: 249737
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249737=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-06-28 Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #10 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 41642
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41642=edit
Patch to add ppc_cpu_supports_hw target support for tests
BTW, the patch attached allows us to check whether
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #9 from Michael Meissner ---
Well in theory we could add yet another switch to enable/disable the warning,
but we have too many switches as it is.
Note, I've put a warning in my development version of the target_clones
patches, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #4)
> I think for the problem of using __builtin_cpu_, we should issue a
> warning
> (not a fatal error) if the configured GLIBC is too old saying you need to link
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tuliom at linux dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra ---
> Alternatively, we would need to do two passes. On the first pass resolve all
> of the normal functions and data locations, setting the location of ifunc
> functions in the TOC to be an error function. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #5 from Peter Bergner ---
Given Alan's comments, I think the best thing to do here is to just emit a
warning when using those builtins when the compiler was configured to use an
old glibc.
If someone disagrees, let me know now, as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
One other possibility is to just remove the code that checks
TARGET_LIBC_PROVIDES_HWCAP_IN_TCB, given that when we use it there is a
reference to __parse_hwcap_and_convert_at_platform in the code. That
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
17 matches
Mail list logo