https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113273
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Hi, sorry about the regression. Could you please check if
https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20240108092434.554918-1-...@linux.ibm.com/
fixes that for you?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113273
--- Comment #3 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Thank you for the confirmation. I will push the fix as soon as my regtests
finish.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113273
--- Comment #4 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
I've pushed the fix. This can be closed as a duplicate of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113251.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113284
Ilya Leoshkevich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iii at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113284
--- Comment #4 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Thanks, I can repro this on cfarm203 now. Apparently I missed
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.cc
index 94fbf46f2b6..fd9bb807957 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113284
--- Comment #6 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Created attachment 57014
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57014&action=edit
patch v2
Thanks for the correction. I've noticed the function label and got tunnel
vision; .opd does indee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115461
Ilya Leoshkevich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iii at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115461
--- Comment #5 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
The LLVM testsuite still passes.
Looking a bit deeper:
$ LSAN_OPTIONS=verbosity=1,log_pointers=1 ./a.out
[...]
0x5080
==1522380==LeakSanitizer: checking for leaks
[...]
==1522381==Scanning STACK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115461
--- Comment #6 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Forgot to add: since the runtime is shared, this observation applies to both
GCC and LLVM.
$ gcc k.c -fsanitize=leak; ./a.out
0x5080
$ LSAN_OPTIONS=use_stacks=0 ./a.out
0x5080
==
Priority: P3
Component: libgcc
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: iii at linux dot ibm.com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm trying to bootstrap gcc with multilib on cfarm422. It is running debian 12,
and as far as I can see all the necessary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118369
--- Comment #14 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Fair enough. Unfortunately mkdir build && cd build && ../configure && make
-j$(nproc) fails the same way.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118369
--- Comment #12 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Sorry, I didn't manage to catch you on IRC today, so continuing here.
Is this conflict considered an issue that will be eventually resolved, or is it
to stay?
I wonder how to proceed; I guess on a shar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118369
--- Comment #2 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
I did quite a few experiments with different sets of flags, and in my log I
have the following marked as FAIL:
../configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++ --enable-shared
--enable-linker-build-id --libexecd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118369
--- Comment #10 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Created attachment 60083
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60083&action=edit
Dockerfile that reflects the cfarm422 environment
I don't have root on cfarm422, so I spent some time clon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118369
--- Comment #6 from Ilya Leoshkevich ---
Thank you for the analysis! I filed
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1092576.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118369
Ilya Leoshkevich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|build |
--- Comment #8 from Ilya Leoshkevic
101 - 116 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
