On Thu, 3 Jul 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 09:41:15AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 7:37:13 AM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 04:06:30PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
I think that makes sense; I'm not aware of anyone
On July 3, 2014 10:47:52 PM CEST, Mark Wielaard m...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 22:14 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 10:04:35PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 21:52 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 8:38:14 PM CEST, Jakub
On July 3, 2014 1:06:30 AM CEST, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
I think that makes sense; I'm not aware of anyone working on improving
LTO debugging.
I've done that in the past. So it would be nice to verify we don't regress
existing tests.
Richard.
Jason
On July 3, 2014 7:37:13 AM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 04:06:30PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
I think that makes sense; I'm not aware of anyone working on
improving LTO
debugging.
I think at this point all we care about is that with -flto we don't ICE
on
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 09:41:15AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 7:37:13 AM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 04:06:30PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
I think that makes sense; I'm not aware of anyone working on
improving LTO
debugging.
I
On July 3, 2014 9:55:36 AM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 09:41:15AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 7:37:13 AM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 04:06:30PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
I think that makes sense;
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:07PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, simply removing the regression testing for LTO is a maintainance
nightmare as well.
The guality testsuite is very noisy anyway with all the xfail and xpass.
Let's keep it as is then?
Jakub
On July 3, 2014 8:38:14 PM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:07PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, simply removing the regression testing for LTO is a
maintainance nightmare as well.
The guality testsuite is very noisy anyway with all the xfail and
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 21:52 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 8:38:14 PM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:07PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, simply removing the regression testing for LTO is a
maintainance nightmare as well.
The
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 10:04:35PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 21:52 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 8:38:14 PM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:07PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
Well, simply removing the
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 22:14 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 10:04:35PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 21:52 +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
On July 3, 2014 8:38:14 PM CEST, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:07PM +0200,
I think that makes sense; I'm not aware of anyone working on improving
LTO debugging.
Jason
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 04:06:30PM -0700, Jason Merrill wrote:
I think that makes sense; I'm not aware of anyone working on improving LTO
debugging.
I think at this point all we care about is that with -flto we don't ICE on
those, perhaps we should arrange to change all the tests into dg-do
13 matches
Mail list logo
