Just to confirm that the patch successfully regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
thanks, Alexander 2013/7/29 Alexander Ivchenko <aivch...@gmail.com>: > 2013/7/28 Michael Eager <ea...@eagerm.com>: >> On 07/27/13 15:18, Alexander Ivchenko wrote: >>> >>> Hi Joseph, thanks for your comments. >>> >>> I updated the patch: >> >> >>> >>> 2013/7/9 Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com>: >> >> >>>> >>>> * It looks rather like microblaze*-*-* don't use elfos.h, so meaning >>>> semantics aren't preserved for those (non-Linux) targets either. Now, I >>>> don't know if there's a good reason for not using that file (ask the >>>> architecture maintainer), but in any case semantics should be preserved. >> >> >> >> I don't know why microblaze does not include elfos.h. It looks like >> it should, to be consistent with other targets. This would require some >> cleanup and verification. >> >> Your patch adds the following to microblaze.h, duplicating the change >> to elfos.h: >> +/* microblaze-unknown-elf target has no support of C99 runtime */ >> +#undef TARGET_LIBC_HAS_FUNCTION >> +#define TARGET_LIBC_HAS_FUNCTION no_c99_libc_has_function >> >> I'm assuming that this means that no other change to microblaze is >> needed and the question about elfos.h is moot. > > Yes, with this change in my patch the semantics for > microblaze-unknown-elf is preserved. As for > microblaze-unknown-linux-gnu case - the > "linux_android_libc_has_function" version of TARGET_LIBC_HAS_FUNCTION > from linux.h will be used, so the semantics is preserved as well. > > --Alexander