https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89829
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Serge Belyshev from comment #0)
> Looking at the *.gcda timestamps, I noticed that incorrect data (the one
> from stageprofile libgcc build) is used, and correct one (from stagetrain)
> is discarded.
>
> The fix is just to revert r254150 which effectively undid 4-stage
> profiledbootstrap to a previous status quo where only libgcc training data
> was used.
Thanks for report. Yes, I can confirm that reversion is the proper fix.
>
> Also note that the r254150 confusion probably stems from the fact that there
> are two stagefeedback-start:: rules in the Makefile.tpl, where the first one
> is generated from stage[+id+]-start:: template. The corresponding recipes
> are executed both, and they are not independent as the first one renames
> directory structure by doing 'make stage'. This (ab)use of double-colon
> rules is not recommended by the GNU make documentation, see
> https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Double_002dColon.
> html#Double_002dColon .
I'm adding here Jakub and Joseph, Makefile gurus.
