From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-486758-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 40419 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2018 01:58:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 40300 invoked by uid 89); 2 Oct 2018 01:58:36 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mail-ot1-f53.google.com
Received: from mail-ot1-f53.google.com (HELO mail-ot1-f53.google.com) (209.85.210.53) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 01:58:35 +0000
Received: by mail-ot1-f53.google.com with SMTP id e18-v6so353907oti.8        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Mon, 01 Oct 2018 18:58:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=20161025;        h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to         :cc;        bh=Kxqrm1vJY5izQssRmRQLp83IeZtPYyHKgsW1X9h9Gqg=;        b=K8l+jSvnqHKCsDj3AWJsyF1Y/aL4jcBZxa9SpoWZWsBc08D7jatC5kxD0nNSDct5x1         Ns/7rZBwd76xGkAAvti3MJhdH7WlJ51fp258mU9krK076gjXMuoUc3kblOVnvVcbpEa7         3ehGOXQlLxa2QHtERPyCtWwZo2w+1IcGcpUW8FUydaFNUPCKIy5WF8YjMYtDExnjsFkI         mHhQGnsJASKYB3u67ul9yFP2+SmJQ97OLvO8mAmLFJVLrV69DlT+IkY7MLHilTtUkoL6         Cxxi44KwaZfvQUEan1y2xdrN04R2jdPBVMwk36WD8l4ufkeCAb6vf7jj+FvbMy0s/ioX         k5Rg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOyqgcUgXMYAkVQco8dcmEChazODizFkZwUiH01jPEpnWNvS3w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMe9rOr6p-qX8tVFUZ9g5G0VMbUf7Gw8XjTFyM68B-GzHTyuww@mail.gmail.com> <CAOyqgcUCuMQv9NkDRNzu4TmgYJU6WwOWVKg5szBJyaZPoEVrPQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMe9rOr7TUteoFP4fj41OTc8df=OpCVtcDgYYNxoQ5HPZN9khA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMe9rOreDWtefU9rnvocJzc3dEx0AX+SaOuFxo9SSbR5jjvs6w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOyqgcUVj67GJqgENAX24vugw7z-2j3gwdzEE+3XYmQeJq+-gQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOyqgcUVj67GJqgENAX24vugw7z-2j3gwdzEE+3XYmQeJq+-gQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 02:37:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOrZH3RKiOEoUzY_RTF5g2XKnAphPxiNq1bJxEZqJnWTGg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: libgo patch committed: Update to 1.11 release
To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, gofrontend-dev@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2018-10/txt/msg00062.txt.bz2

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 5:06 PM Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 4:56 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Compared with my patch, there are some new failures:
>
> Thanks.  We probably need a patch in gcc/testsuite/go.test/go-test.exp
> to set goarch to amd64p32 when appropriate.
>
> Other than that there seems to be some sort of signal handling
> problem.  Hard to say what that might be.
>

Does amd64p32 disable any amd64 specific handling?

-- 
H.J.