On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 11:23 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:18:06AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: > > > This passed bootstrap and regtesting on powerpc64-linux with no > > > regressions. > > > Ok for mainline? > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > * config.gcc (powerpc*-*-linux*): Include gnu-user.h in tm_file. > > > * config/rs6000/sysv4.h (CC!_SPEC): Undefine it before defining > > > it. > > > > Typo in ChangeLog (CC!)?
Woops, good catch. I'll fix that. > > This seems weird. Why wasn't this file included before or whenever it > > was added for other *-linux targets? This seems to define SPECs that > > should have been necessary before now. This was comitted by Joseph with revision 168711 and submitted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-12/msg02055.html The patch seems to move some defines from linux.h to gnu-user.h and it looks like powerpc*-linux doesn't include linux.h either. Is that another header file we're supposed to include? ...or do our rs6000/linux{,64}.h header files completely obviate the need for that? > All other Linux targets where asan is supported got the right definitions > from gnu-user.h, it was needed even on the older release branches. > > As including gnu-user.h there might be too risky for the release branches, > perhaps it would be better to copy the LIB[AT]SAN* macros from gnu-user.h > to say rs6000/linux.h or rs6000/linux64.h on the release branches (and in 4.8 > also > STATIC_LIB[AT]SAN_LIBS). That's fine with me. I'll make that change and bootstrap/regtest it. Peter