Message ID | CAKOQZ8wrdS19sN0nHs5u-_G8U1fhpeL3LRg_15hjCUUZw7zU7A@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 09:16:32AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Segher Boessenkool > <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > Ah, I see. Could you change the comment then, to say what we are > > really testing? > > Sure. Updated as follows. Committed to mainline. Thanks! Segher
Index: gcc.dg/tree-prof/split-1.c =================================================================== --- gcc.dg/tree-prof/split-1.c (revision 249128) +++ gcc.dg/tree-prof/split-1.c (working copy) @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ -/* Test case that we don't get a link-time error when using - -fsplit-stack with -freorder-blocks-and-partition. */ -/* { dg-require-effective-target freorder } */ +/* Test that we don't get a link-time error when using -fsplit-stack + due to implicit enabling of -freorder-blocks-and-partition. */ +/* { dg-require-effective-target split_stack } */ /* { dg-options "-O2 -fsplit-stack" } */ extern unsigned int sleep (unsigned int);