On 02/26/2018 02:20 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 05:56:28PM -0600, Daniel Santos wrote:
>>> --- libgcc/config/i386/i386-asm.h.jj2018-01-03 10:42:56.317763517
>>> +0100
>>> +++ libgcc/config/i386/i386-asm.h 2018-02-22 15:33:43.812922298 +0100
>>> @@ -27,8 +27,47 @@
On 02/22/2018 07:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 06:01:16PM -0600, Daniel Santos wrote:
>> Thanks. I like the idea of commonizing the macros for consistency.
>
> Didn't see a progress on this P3 for a while, so I've written this
> version of the patch; no tests thou
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 05:56:28PM -0600, Daniel Santos wrote:
> > --- libgcc/config/i386/i386-asm.h.jj2018-01-03 10:42:56.317763517
> > +0100
> > +++ libgcc/config/i386/i386-asm.h 2018-02-22 15:33:43.812922298 +0100
> > @@ -27,8 +27,47 @@ see the files COPYING3 and COPYING.RUNTI
> > #d
Sorry for the dropping the ball on this and thank you Jakub for stepping in!
I've had a patch set sort-of rotting in my local repo, but I like yours
better. I think I had gotten hung up on trying to figure out how to
write a test for this, and like you I just tested mine manually in gdb.
I do ha
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 03:56:15PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Ok for trunk if it passes bootstrap/regtest on x86_64-linux and i686-linux?
Now successfully bootstrapped/regtested on these targets.
> 2018-02-22 Jakub Jelinek
>
> PR debug/83917
> * config/i386/i386-asm.h (PACKAGE_
Hi!
On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 06:01:16PM -0600, Daniel Santos wrote:
> Thanks. I like the idea of commonizing the macros for consistency.
Didn't see a progress on this P3 for a while, so I've written this
version of the patch; no tests though, what I've been using in testing was:
/* { dg-do compil