https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31179
--- Comment #2 from David Abdurachmanov
---
To add some context here. Debian is using pre-2.42 bintuils, and GCC 13 failed
to build:
[..]
riscv64-linux-gnu-gdc-12 -no-pie -lstdc++ -g -DIN_GCC -fno-exceptions
-fno-rtti -fasynchronous-un
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31179
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david.abdurachmanov at gmail
do
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I was checking default search paths reported by ld on Fedora/RISCv, GNU ld
version 2.40-10.0.riscv64.fc38.
SEARCH_DIR("=/usr/riscv64-redhat-li
Priority: P2
Component: binutils
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I noticed that RISCV disassembler options are not documented in binutils.texi
The options supported by RISCV are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23956
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david.abdurachmanov at gmail
do
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22962
--- Comment #14 from David Abdurachmanov
---
Looking at output of ld --verbose
[..]
SEARCH_DIR("=/usr/riscv64-redhat-linux/lib64"); SEARCH_DIR("=/usr/lib64");
SEARCH_DIR("=/usr/local/lib64"); SEARCH_DIR("=/lib64");
SEARCH_DIR("=/usr/riscv64-
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22962
--- Comment #13 from David Abdurachmanov
---
Fedora uses symlinks to be compatible to what's expected by RISC-V software
ecosystem (or more precisely glibc).
[root@stage4 ~]# ll /usr/lib64/lp64d
lrwxrwxrwx 1 roo
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22962
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david.abdurachmanov at gmail
do
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
--- Comment #12 from David Abdurachmanov
---
For the record, the patch for "-Wl,--defsym=foo=0x8000" fix is here
(already approved):
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2015-07/msg00210.html
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You a
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
--- Comment #11 from David Abdurachmanov
---
I tested it in the last couple of days and it worked fine. Details on GCC
bugzilla: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC li
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
--- Comment #8 from David Abdurachmanov
---
Could you point to GCC PR you mentioned? I just want to x-check why my
toolchain build works.
I will give your patch a spin once it lands, though OpenLoops still won't fully
compile (offset betwee
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
--- Comment #6 from David Abdurachmanov
---
My last test was with GCC 4.9.3, that did not ICE during OpenLoops compilation.
Thanks for looking into this!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
--- Comment #4 from David Abdurachmanov
---
I all process libraries except one in OpenLoops, that's enough to trigger the
issue.
You can get it here (4.7M):
http://davidlt.web.cern.ch/davidlt/vault/openloops-1.1.1-stripped.tar.bz2
$ sha256s
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
--- Comment #3 from David Abdurachmanov
---
OpenLoops are suffering from another issue -- the offset between load
instruction and constant pool is above 1MB boundary. Yes, you cannot have huge
functions in AArch64.
PR63304 on GCC (https://gc
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
--
Y
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64-*-linux-gnu
: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The issues was discovered in OpenLoops package, also this was raised on the
internet earlier. IIUC, this works fine
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18270
--- Comment #5 from David Abdurachmanov
---
Thanks for the bugfix!
I think you mentioned a wrong PR in changelog. PR18279 instead of PR18270.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18270
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pbrobinson at gmail dot com
--
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18270
David Abdurachmanov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||aarch64-*-linux-gnu
: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: david.abdurachmanov at gmail dot com
Discussion started 2014 July:
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2014-07/msg00130.html
Noticed while building CVMFS on Fedora 22 AArch64
21 matches
Mail list logo
