https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #33 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: boger
Date: Wed Oct 28 16:00:46 2015
New Revision: 229493
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229493&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport of r229009
PR66870 PowerPC64 Enable gold linker with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #32 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Mon Oct 19 23:50:30 2015
New Revision: 229009
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229009&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR66870 PowerPC64 Enable gold linker with split stack
A powerpc-linux/powe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #31 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: boger
Date: Thu Oct 8 19:21:45 2015
New Revision: 228623
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228623&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport of rev 228311
PR target/66870
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #30 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Oct 1 14:43:57 2015
New Revision: 228342
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228342&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/66870
* gospec.c (lang_specific_driver): Onl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #28 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
I could put back the #ifdef TARGET_CAN_SPLIT_STACK_64BIT around the OPT_m32
case if that is OK.
Doesn't fail on the builds for ppc64le or ppc64 either.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #27 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Any target that doesn't have a -m32 option. This does work on x86 targets,
since they have a -m32 option in their config/CPU/CPU.opt file. Sorry for not
catching this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #26 from Andreas Schwab ---
Just try any target.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #25 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #24)
> ../../gcc/go/gospec.c: In function 'void
> lang_specific_driver(cl_decoded_option**, unsigned int*, int*)':
> ../../gcc/go/gospec.c:161:7: error: 'OPT
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #24 from Andreas Schwab ---
../../gcc/go/gospec.c: In function 'void
lang_specific_driver(cl_decoded_option**, unsigned int*, int*)':
../../gcc/go/gospec.c:161:7: error: 'OPT_m32' was not declared in this scope
case OPT_m32:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #23 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Wed Sep 30 23:06:11 2015
New Revision: 228311
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228311&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66870
* config/rs6000/sysv4.h (TARGET_CA
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #22 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Aug 13 05:25:02 2015
New Revision: 226848
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226848&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
More split-stack fixes
Backport rev 226443
2015-07-31 Alan Modra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #21 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 36142
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36142&action=edit
Configure gold with split stack based on binutils version
This is an updated version of the previous
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #20 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: boger
Date: Wed Aug 5 18:07:16 2015
New Revision: 226643
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226643&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-08-15 Lynn Boger
PR target/66870
* gcc/c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #19 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #18)
> In the patch in comment #17, the code in gcc/configure.ac looks misplaced:
> shouldn't it be before the ";;", and not add another ";;"?
>
> Can you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #18 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
In the patch in comment #17, the code in gcc/configure.ac looks misplaced:
shouldn't it be before the ";;", and not add another ";;"?
Can you explain why the test in libgo/configure.ac will fail for a li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #17 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 36132
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36132&action=edit
Configure gold linker with split stack if available
Attaching my patch to detect for split stack supp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #16 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Fri Jul 31 14:05:42 2015
New Revision: 226443
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226443&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66870
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (machine_function)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #15 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
I have submitted my patch to gcc-patches to check for the no_split_stack
attribute after revising it based on Alan's comments.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #14 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
I did bootstrap a build on ppc64 multilib, using Alan's latest and my patch and
Andreas' patch on a system with glibc >= 2.18. (Without Andreas' patch it
won't bootstrap on the 32 bit build on this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #13 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Use of the gold linker on ppc64 (BE) with static linking results in these
warnings:
/usr/local/gold/bin/ld.gold: warning:
/usr/lib/gcc/ppc64-redhat-linux/4.8.3/../../../../lib64/libc.a(malloc.o): .o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #12 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 36003
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36003&action=edit
fix shrink-wrap issue
The attached patch cures the shrink wrap problem. I haven't yet bootstrapped
it but fmt.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #11 from Alan Modra ---
I can reproduce the fail. It is caused by shrink-wrapping.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #10 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Now that I am building on ppc64 with a new enough glibc, using my latest
patches for rs6000.c and Andreas' patch, and forcing the gold linker to be
used, I am hitting a testcase failure in the libgo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #9 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #6)
> > (past a few statements)
>
> Huh?
>
> @@ -158,10 +158,6 @@ go_langhook_init_options_struct (struct gcc_options
> *opts)
> @@ -295,6 +291,11 @@ go_lan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #8 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
Created attachment 35989
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35989&action=edit
Clean up checks for flag_split_stack and attribute no_split_stack
Made the change related to Alan's co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Schwab ---
> (past a few statements)
Huh?
@@ -158,10 +158,6 @@ go_langhook_init_options_struct (struct gcc_options *opts)
@@ -295,6 +291,11 @@ go_langhook_post_options (const char **pfilename
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #5 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #4)
> > past a few statements
>
> Huh??
Here is your patch
diff --git a/gcc/go/go-lang.c b/gcc/go/go-lang.c
index ce4dd9b..d952e0f 100644
--- a/gcc/go/go-l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab ---
> past a few statements
Huh??
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
> In gcc.c there is STACK_SPLIT_SPEC which sets --wrap=pthread_create in the
> LINK_COMMAND_SPEC if -fsplit-stack is set. Is there a reason there are 2
> different split stack dependent link options are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #2 from boger at us dot ibm.com ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #1)
> The various issues in this bug are in different parts of the code base. The
> bug is assigned to me, but, to be clear, I have no plans to work on any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66870
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
The various issues in this bug are in different parts of the code base. The
bug is assigned to me, but, to be clear, I have no plans to work on anything in
the PPC-specific code.
For x86, TARGET_CAN_SPLI
33 matches
Mail list logo
