[Bug testsuite/41659] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20090914-2 c_lto_20090914-2_0.o assemble, -O0 -fwhopr

2010-01-02 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-02 14:23 --- Fixed as of http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-12/msg02393.html. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug testsuite/41659] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20090914-2 c_lto_20090914-2_0.o assemble, -O0 -fwhopr

2009-10-12 Thread janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-12 16:06 --- It doesn't have the desired or expected effect, just the documented effect. From the GCC internals manual section 6.4.6 Support for testing link-time optimizations: Unlike dg-do, dg-lto-do does not support an

[Bug testsuite/41659] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20090914-2 c_lto_20090914-2_0.o assemble, -O0 -fwhopr

2009-10-12 Thread janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-12 17:13 --- Subject: Bug 41659 Author: janis Date: Mon Oct 12 17:13:41 2009 New Revision: 152671 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=152671 Log: PR testsuite/41659 * gcc.dg/lto/20090914-2.c: Use

[Bug testsuite/41659] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/20090914-2 c_lto_20090914-2_0.o assemble, -O0 -fwhopr

2009-10-10 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-10 17:02 --- Hm. So /* { dg-lto-do run { target x86_64-*-* i?86-*-* } } */ doesn't have the desired effect... -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added