------- Comment #9 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-15 15:17 ------- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > A bisection has identified revision 139725 as the origin of this regression. > > That revision added support for -fsection-anchors on arm and enabled it by > default at -O1 and above. Compiling with -fno-section-anchors eliminates the > regressions in the binutils ld testsuite (tested with 4.4.1 and 4.5-20091008). > > I did a test with the range of anchor offsets reduced from [-4088,+4095] to a > tiny [-120,+127], which should work with any arm instruction, but that did not > eliminate the regressions. > > I'm currently bootstrapping and testing a patch which disable section anchors > on arm. It will be interesting to see if it fixes any testsuite failures. >
I would rather find out why the middle end function use_anchor_for_symbol doesn't reject the symbol for section anchors and fix this appropriately by either specifying appropriate binds_local_p or the use_anchor_for_symbol handler appropriately. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41684 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
