https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
Indu Bhagat changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ibhagat at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #21 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Indu Bhagat from comment #20)
> Commit https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f007a638a86e4b59bef0a0d8efa5bb8c5e5b200a added
> support for targets to opt out of CTF/BTF support.
I think that from the Darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #20 from Indu Bhagat ---
Commit https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f007a638a86e4b59bef0a0d8efa5bb8c5e5b200a added
support for targets to opt out of CTF/BTF support.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dje at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #18 from Indu Bhagat ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> It might make sense to provide targets a means to opt-out of CTF/BTF support
> and thus diagnose -gctf as unsupported on them.
Yes, I agree. It makes sense to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Indu Bhagat :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d9e9532bb3bf5db4cd6afd49d343ede5b27c3c9f
commit r12-2094-gd9e9532bb3bf5db4cd6afd49d343ede5b27c3c9f
Author: Indu Bhagat
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #16 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Indu Bhagat :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:97bcacfb5ac49afa4e305489dd110cc446451549
commit r12-2093-g97bcacfb5ac49afa4e305489dd110cc446451549
Author: Indu Bhagat
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #15 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Indu Bhagat :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:151b423a82f4bf15e3225833028f5258ea254cb9
commit r12-2090-g151b423a82f4bf15e3225833028f5258ea254cb9
Author: Indu Bhagat
Date: Tue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #14 from Indu Bhagat ---
With the two patches (commit r12-2044-ga3543b5e8002c033b2304d7ac1d1e58218eebb51
+ the other in review) only two further failures remain to be looked into:
FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/btf/btf-bitfields-3.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Indu Bhagat :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3543b5e8002c033b2304d7ac1d1e58218eebb51
commit r12-2044-ga3543b5e8002c033b2304d7ac1d1e58218eebb51
Author: Indu Bhagat
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #12 from Indu Bhagat ---
The intention is to be able to generate CTF/BTF correctly irrespective of the
DWARF version.
The case of DW_TAG_restrict_type is unique though, and looks like we will need
special handling. To be specific,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Indu Bhagat from comment #10)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #9)
> > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> > > we are now left with (where I suspect that the remaining fails are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #10 from Indu Bhagat ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #9)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> > we are now left with (where I suspect that the remaining fails are an
> > artefact of the way in which Darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> we are now left with (where I suspect that the remaining fails are an
> artefact of the way in which Darwin represents offsets instead of
> relocations in DWARF
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe ---
we are now left with (where I suspect that the remaining fails are an artefact
of the way in which Darwin represents offsets instead of relocations in DWARF
debug sections):
Running target unix/-m64
Running
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:85017431068251628478f38346c273418c71209b
commit r12-1983-g85017431068251628478f38346c273418c71209b
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:eb817f27e82769aef545d580a0c47a3aa50d1ec4
commit r12-1982-geb817f27e82769aef545d580a0c47a3aa50d1ec4
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> It might make sense to provide targets a means to opt-out of CTF/BTF support
> and thus diagnose -gctf as unsupported on them.
In the short-term, I've got fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
It might make sense to provide targets a means to opt-out of CTF/BTF support
and thus diagnose -gctf as unsupported on them.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Indu Bhagat from comment #2)
> I see that .section directive needs a different semantic for Darwin. The
> DWARF debug_info section, for example, appears as:
>
> .section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
Indu Bhagat changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ibhagatgnu at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101283
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cc8453012f75dc6dbd20bf3a94c4819a2bff46db
commit r12-1960-gcc8453012f75dc6dbd20bf3a94c4819a2bff46db
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date:
23 matches
Mail list logo
