From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 65157 invoked by alias); 18 May 2016 18:20:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 65147 invoked by uid 89); 18 May 2016 18:20:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mail-qg0-f65.google.com Received: from mail-qg0-f65.google.com (HELO mail-qg0-f65.google.com) (209.85.192.65) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 18 May 2016 18:20:31 +0000 Received: by mail-qg0-f65.google.com with SMTP id 90so4875064qgz.0 for ; Wed, 18 May 2016 11:20:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=IxvAN+rcSEoCkaNOdrfTrSfCnoG8QKS8q299c7BwwQw=; b=KcNDLay5qhcYwGAKm7hXnwoXbcVFaCu3j2MtKpft76iuvcM+cN7xbdWsTRVW4SL6pZ bg/y2jh+gFL/OdCsJ5y2psm1NcrfqQ4KnvVBCnArmAUt8FmFAnT70ITQY7JUF8eRKSn6 J635UHfkyMQDBbio62nKbNp3emehZMMHqQTUqiukjLYxZrdPdMDMSSgtd05MVcPib1zD pA1f+b97rJ2dvcN59YVtWnTLlvPj2VKWq8ENwJKby7HJnEXxMc++2UtDuagQiA/HswfO rg7apKN98p7105qkUPDhSXWWzn+B1xGEzyyclsOiTLZ8GrlxxEtZb17L8YYjOc8J55Nm tfRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWgB57Gpq8oCfnKN4hNdu3loc31Z68ZWNJD1qhGZ3u8Qq6qAEMqXBgwzYBMs3Uuk0XmUM/e7uDZ6b+sJw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.104.146 with SMTP id a18mr9155279qgf.26.1463595629495; Wed, 18 May 2016 11:20:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.55.221.134 with HTTP; Wed, 18 May 2016 11:20:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160518181139.GA24289@gate.crashing.org> References: <213485283eede9da12b217737d95fc8f5c4be442.1463428211.git.segher@kernel.crashing.org> <20160518181139.GA24289@gate.crashing.org> Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 18:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] function: Factor out make_*logue_seq From: "H.J. Lu" To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg01399.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:17:32AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Segher Boessenkool >> wrote: >> > Make new functions make_split_prologue_seq, make_prologue_seq, and >> > make_epilogue_seq. >> > >> > Tested as in the previous patch; is this okay for trunk? >> > >> > >> > Segher >> > >> > >> > 2016-05-16 Segher Boessenkool >> > >> > * function.c (make_split_prologue_seq, make_prologue_seq, >> > make_epilogue_seq): New functions, factored out from... >> > (thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns): Here. >> > >> >> It breaks x86: > > Are you sure it is this patch causing it? As noted, it was tested on x86. > I am pretty sure. How did you test it on x86? What do you get with # make check-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=ctor*.C --target_board='unix{-m32,}'" -- H.J.