[Bug other/96217] undefined reference to `_Unwind_Resume'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96217 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to LE GARREC Vincent from comment #0) > Created attachment 48880 [details] > glibc-build.zip > > I work on Gentoo. I compiled gcc with -O0 and I was able to complete the > build (I didn't executed tests). > > But I try to compile glibc with gcc built with -O0. The log says : > > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ > ld.bfd: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/32/libgcc.a(_divdi3.o): in > function `__divdi3': > /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.1.0-r2/work/gcc-10.1.0/libgcc/libgcc2.c: > 1246: undefined reference to `_Unwind_Resume' > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ > ld.bfd: > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/32/libgcc.a(_divdi3.o):(.data.rel. > local.DW.ref.__gcc_personality_v0[DW.ref.__gcc_personality_v0]+0x0): > undefined reference to `__gcc_personality_v0' > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ > ld.bfd: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/32/libgcc.a(_moddi3.o): in > function `__moddi3': > /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.1.0-r2/work/gcc-10.1.0/libgcc/libgcc2.c: > 1269: undefined reference to `_Unwind_Resume' > > A simple test case is really hard because gcc successfully built small other > packages and I have no idea why I have this "undefined reference". > > I was able to compiling gcc with -O2 (with gcc built with -O0) then to build > glibc successfully. > > Please find enclosed the build.log of glibc. How did you build GCC with -O0? I never have any problems glibc build using GCC built with -O0. I configure GCC -O0 build with CC="gcc" CXX="g++" BOOT_CFLAGS="-O0 -g" CFLAGS="-O0 -g" BOOT_CXXFLAGS="-g" CXXFLAGS="-g" CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-O2 -g" CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-O2 -g" /export/gnu/import/git/sources/gcc/configure --disable-bootstrap
[Bug c++/79378] lambda init-capture adds const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79378
Vittorio Romeo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vittorio.romeo at outlook dot
com
--- Comment #2 from Vittorio Romeo ---
Stumbled upon this again, with this example:
template
constexpr bool is_same_v = false;
template
constexpr bool is_same_v = true;
auto l = [k = 0]
{
static_assert(is_same_v);
};
This bug is still not fixed in the latest version of GCC (trunk).
Related StackOverflow post:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62963712/decltype-of-generalized-lambda-capture-inside-body-of-a-lambda-gcc-vs-clang
Example on Compiler Explorer:
https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/jY9cfW
[Bug other/96217] undefined reference to `_Unwind_Resume'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96217 --- Comment #6 from LE GARREC Vincent --- My log says : >>> Configuring source in >>> /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.1.0-r2/work/gcc-10.1.0 ... * CFLAGS="-march=native -O0 -ggdb2 -g2 -pipe -fno-omit-frame-pointer" * CXXFLAGS="-march=native -O0 -ggdb2 -g2 -pipe -fno-omit-frame-pointer" * LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O0 -Wl,--as-needed" * PREFIX: /usr * BINPATH: /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/10.1.0 * LIBPATH: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0 * DATAPATH:/usr/share/gcc-data/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0 * STDCXX_INCDIR: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/include/g++-v10 * Languages: c,c++,fortran * Configuring GCC with: * --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu * --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu * --prefix=/usr * --bindir=/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/10.1.0 * --includedir=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/include * --datadir=/usr/share/gcc-data/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0 * --mandir=/usr/share/gcc-data/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/man * --infodir=/usr/share/gcc-data/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/info * --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/include/g++-v10 * --with-python-dir=/share/gcc-data/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/10.1.0/python * --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran * --enable-obsolete * --enable-secureplt * --disable-werror * --with-system-zlib * --disable-nls * --enable-checking=release * --with-bugurl=https://bugs.gentoo.org/ * --with-pkgversion=Gentoo 10.1.0-r2 p3 * --disable-esp * --enable-libstdcxx-time * --enable-shared * --enable-threads=posix * --enable-__cxa_atexit * --enable-clocale=gnu * --enable-multilib * --with-multilib-list=m32,m64 * --disable-fixed-point * --enable-targets=all * --enable-libgomp * --disable-libmudflap * --disable-libssp * --disable-libada * --disable-systemtap * --enable-vtable-verify * --without-zstd * --enable-lto * --without-isl * --enable-default-pie * --enable-default-ssp
[Bug target/95973] Add __cpuidex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95973 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma ||il/gcc-patches/2020-July/55 ||0244.html Keywords||patch Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2020-07-18 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- A patch is posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/550244.html
[Bug target/96238] [i386] cpuid.h header needs include guards
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96238 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma ||il/gcc-patches/2020-July/55 ||0244.html Version|unknown |11.0 Last reconfirmed||2020-07-18 Keywords||patch Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- A patch is posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/550244.html
[Bug other/96217] undefined reference to `_Unwind_Resume'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96217 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to LE GARREC Vincent from comment #6) > My log says : > > >>> Configuring source in > >>> /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-10.1.0-r2/work/gcc-10.1.0 ... > * CFLAGS="-march=native -O0 -ggdb2 -g2 -pipe -fno-omit-frame-pointer" > * CXXFLAGS="-march=native -O0 -ggdb2 -g2 -pipe -fno-omit-frame-pointer" I don't think it works. You can compile GCC compiler with -O0. But you need to compile GCC run-time at least with -O. Please add CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-O2 -g" CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-O2 -g"
[Bug target/95620] [10/11 Regression] relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC32 against `.bss'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95620 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7aa22a8f1a5cd7f79d6bdd8b56ef7ab89a43bce3 commit r11-2208-g7aa22a8f1a5cd7f79d6bdd8b56ef7ab89a43bce3 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Fri Jun 26 13:59:31 2020 -0700 x86-64: Define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL Define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL for large local common symbol. gcc/ PR target/95620 * config/i386/x86-64.h (ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGNED_DECL_LOCAL): New. libgomp/ PR target/95620 * testsuite/libgomp.c/pr95620.c: New test.
[Bug target/95620] [10/11 Regression] relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC32 against `.bss'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95620 --- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu --- Fixed for GCC 11 so far.
[Bug fortran/85796] ICE: Floating point exception
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85796
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/resolve.c (revision 280157)
+++ gcc/fortran/resolve.c (working copy)
@@ -16174,27 +16174,34 @@ traverse_data_list (gfc_data_variable *var, locus
*whe
end = gfc_copy_expr (var->iter.end);
step = gfc_copy_expr (var->iter.step);
- if (!gfc_simplify_expr (start, 1)
- || start->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
+ if (!gfc_simplify_expr (start, 1) || start->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
{
gfc_error ("start of implied-do loop at %L could not be "
"simplified to a constant value", &start->where);
retval = false;
goto cleanup;
}
- if (!gfc_simplify_expr (end, 1)
- || end->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
+
+ if (!gfc_simplify_expr (end, 1) || end->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
{
gfc_error ("end of implied-do loop at %L could not be "
"simplified to a constant value", &start->where);
retval = false;
goto cleanup;
}
- if (!gfc_simplify_expr (step, 1)
- || step->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
+
+ if (!gfc_simplify_expr (step, 1) || step->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
{
gfc_error ("step of implied-do loop at %L could not be "
-"simplified to a constant value", &start->where);
+"simplified to a constant value", &step->where);
+ retval = false;
+ goto cleanup;
+}
+
+ if (mpz_cmp_si (step->value.integer, 0) == 0)
+{
+ gfc_error ("step of implied-do loop at %L shall not be zero",
+&step->where);
retval = false;
goto cleanup;
}
[Bug fortran/85796] ICE: Floating point exception
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85796 jvdelisle at charter dot net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jvdelisle at charter dot net --- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at charter dot net --- This looks OK Steve. Assuming your regression tested, shall I commit this for you?
[Bug fortran/85796] ICE: Floating point exception
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85796 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 08:13:31PM +, jvdelisle at charter dot net wrote: > > --- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at charter dot net --- > This looks OK Steve. Assuming your regression tested, shall I commit this for > you? > My regression test shows 22 regression, but none can be associated with this patch. There are lto errors about linking, which likely means gfortran is finding FreeBSD ld (rtld) instead of binutils. I'm also getting an odd failure with 'gmake -j7 chec-fortran' where a submake is dying with 'argument to -j must be positive'. Odd?
[Bug fortran/85796] ICE: Floating point exception
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85796 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4) > On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 08:13:31PM +, jvdelisle at charter dot net wrote: > > > > --- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at charter dot net --- > > This looks OK Steve. Assuming your regression tested, shall I commit this > > for > > you? > > > > My regression test shows 22 regression, but none can be > associated with this patch. There are lto errors about > linking, which likely means gfortran is finding FreeBSD > ld (rtld) instead of binutils. > > I'm also getting an odd failure with 'gmake -j7 chec-fortran' > where a submake is dying with 'argument to -j must be positive'. > Odd? Ugh. configure is broken. I asked for --enable-languages=c,fortran. Because, I left out c++, configure helpfully added in c++,lto. Not good. Had to add --disable-lto. Regression tests fine.
