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
