gcc-4.6: Migrate recipes from OE-Core

Remove linaro patches. If one needs to use linaro
modified gcc they should use meta-linaro

Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 62 deletions

diff --git a/toolchain-layer/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.6/linaro/gcc-4.6-linaro-r106783.patch b/toolchain-layer/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.6/linaro/gcc-4.6-linaro-r106783.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 61e3916375..0000000000
--- a/toolchain-layer/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-4.6/linaro/gcc-4.6-linaro-r106783.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,62 +0,0 @@
-2011-07-31  Revital Eres  <revital.eres@linaro.org>
-
-        gcc/
-        Backport from trunk -r176970:
-
-        * modulo-sched.c: Change comment.
-        (reset_sched_times): Fix print message.
-        (print_partial_schedule): Add print info.
-
-=== modified file 'gcc/modulo-sched.c'
---- old/gcc/modulo-sched.c      2011-07-04 12:01:34 +0000
-+++ new/gcc/modulo-sched.c      2011-07-31 10:58:46 +0000
-@@ -84,13 +84,14 @@
-       II cycles (i.e. use register copies to prevent a def from overwriting
-       itself before reaching the use).
- 
--    SMS works with countable loops whose loop count can be easily
--    adjusted.  This is because we peel a constant number of iterations
--    into a prologue and epilogue for which we want to avoid emitting
--    the control part, and a kernel which is to iterate that constant
--    number of iterations less than the original loop.  So the control
--    part should be a set of insns clearly identified and having its
--    own iv, not otherwise used in the loop (at-least for now), which
-+    SMS works with countable loops (1) whose control part can be easily
-+    decoupled from the rest of the loop and (2) whose loop count can
-+    be easily adjusted.  This is because we peel a constant number of
-+    iterations into a prologue and epilogue for which we want to avoid
-+    emitting the control part, and a kernel which is to iterate that
-+    constant number of iterations less than the original loop.  So the
-+    control part should be a set of insns clearly identified and having
-+    its own iv, not otherwise used in the loop (at-least for now), which
-     initializes a register before the loop to the number of iterations.
-     Currently SMS relies on the do-loop pattern to recognize such loops,
-     where (1) the control part comprises of all insns defining and/or
-@@ -598,8 +599,8 @@
-             /* Print the scheduling times after the rotation.  */
-             fprintf (dump_file, "crr_insn->node=%d (insn id %d), "
-                      "crr_insn->cycle=%d, min_cycle=%d", crr_insn->node->cuid,
--                     INSN_UID (crr_insn->node->insn), SCHED_TIME (u),
--                     normalized_time);
-+                     INSN_UID (crr_insn->node->insn), normalized_time,
-+                     new_min_cycle);
-             if (JUMP_P (crr_insn->node->insn))
-               fprintf (dump_file, " (branch)");
-             fprintf (dump_file, "\n");
-@@ -2550,8 +2551,13 @@
-       fprintf (dump, "\n[ROW %d ]: ", i);
-       while (ps_i)
-        {
--         fprintf (dump, "%d, ",
--                  INSN_UID (ps_i->node->insn));
-+         if (JUMP_P (ps_i->node->insn))
-+           fprintf (dump, "%d (branch), ",
-+                    INSN_UID (ps_i->node->insn));
-+         else
-+           fprintf (dump, "%d, ",
-+                    INSN_UID (ps_i->node->insn));
-+       
-          ps_i = ps_i->next_in_row;
-        }
-     }
-