On Mon, May 4, 2026, at 10:02 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Mon, May 4, 2026 at 5:26 AM Pietro Monteiro > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Ping. > > > Ok for the rest of the series. > > Thanks, > Andrea
Thanks again for the reviews. I pushed the rest of the series. And this updates to the local patches list as obvious: commit ec47faf829cf95af8b97c2cb6b12f44ad9550d0c (HEAD -> trunk) Author: Pietro Monteiro <[email protected]> Date: Thu May 21 17:55:18 2026 -0400 libffi: Update list of local patches Remove all old patches and add the one after the most recent upgrade. libffi/ChangeLog: * LOCAL_PATCHES: Update list. Signed-off-by: Pietro Monteiro <[email protected]> diff --git a/libffi/LOCAL_PATCHES b/libffi/LOCAL_PATCHES index ee08e9433e2..b7878e0edd7 100644 --- a/libffi/LOCAL_PATCHES +++ b/libffi/LOCAL_PATCHES @@ -1,18 +1,4 @@ -5be7b66998127286fada45e4f23bd8a2056d553e -4824ed41ba7cd63e60fd9f8769a58b79935a90d1 -90205f67e465ae7dfcf733c2b2b177ca7ff68da0 -333efaea633971912f2208d37b7b62992759d400 -a91f844ef449d0dd1cf2e0e47b0ade0d8a6304e1 -3cc159bc01516e370e8f119db70e2fbd803f3f80 -902c755930326cb4405672aa3ea13c35c653cbff -e4703bd0e15b4ed6e5eae36604b28bd4ca4f8cee -043550bceea7881163bba5d8a0486bb100a05809 -4beacf3cb8d128b3b9c8c2d3824693b895414428 -6a6d3817afa02bbcd2388c8e005da6faf88932f1 -a0673ec5f9236dca6ada23f28343c591ccd575e4 -967d4171b2eb0557e86ba28996423353f0f1b141 -35b05a02de1e8aee7c754a20f50736977c71caca -61aa380bad45fb070379f259f7abc5e5f50c9009 -9e1c71bab50d51a1a8ec1a75080ffde6ca3d854c -9fb5348e3021021e82d75e4ca4e6f8d51a34c24f -a616b7e1db7319c587b9c65fe9548c59c67d1234 +71ecf327b4486584c0d0e3591caef00e87b40bd3 +8b5cb5bfeaeb64c232fe0147cb430f22d3f5e18d +922414dd0975bd556059a65963f7e2a222849442 +c2fbaa4da5f2c46032109925fa8ae26f5f185ab1 pietro > >> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026, at 11:44 PM, Pietro Monteiro wrote: >> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026, at 9:48 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >> >>> Thanks. I pushed the first 2 patches to trunk and the rest to a branch >> >>> on the forge. >> >>> I also opened a pull request: >> >>> https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc/gcc-TEST/pulls/137 >> >> >> >> Thanks again for doing this. >> >> >> >> Everyone else, >> >> It would be useful to for folks to test this on different targets. >> >> Solaris and Darwin are the 2 big ones which I don't have really way to >> >> test, rather I Have not tried on the cfarm yet. Mingw is the other one >> >> that I don't really have access to. It has already been tested on >> >> x86_64-linux-gnu and the results were clean. >> > >> > I regtested on cfarm216, sparcv9-sun-solaris2.11, and the results look >> > good. >> > There's a bit of weirdness about three tests now passing: >> > >> > Tests that now work, but didn't before (3 tests): >> > >> > g++: g++.dg/modules/pr99425-2_a.X -std=c++17 (test for excess errors) >> > libgo: text/template >> > libitm: libitm.c/simple-2.c execution test >> > >> > >> >>> I will test this on aarch64-linux-gnu tomorrow or the next day. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > pietro
