On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 13:47 -0600, Jeff Law wrote: > On 06/03/2013 01:27 PM, Iyer, Balaji V wrote: > > > > I am OK with Steve's changes in most cases. In a few cases, I am > > using it as a parameter to pass into tests. On a top-level, the main > > reason why I used argc, and argv is that, I want to make sure the > > compiler will never do things like constant propagation, and it will > > pass it as a variable. > So use Jakub's trick, or define non-inlinable functions which return > suitable tables. > > We simply can't use argc/argv in the manner in which those tests do and > I'd rather clean up the test to avoid argc/argv than support two paths > through the test, one with argc/argv, one without. > > jeff
I'll leave fixing the tests to Balaji then instead of doing it myself since that way he can be sure that they are testing what he wants to test. Steve Ellcey sell...@mips.com
