https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70560
James Hilliard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||james.hilliard1 at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70560
--- Comment #5 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> (In reply to James Hilliard from comment #2)
> > We've been hitting a bug in buildroot with an application(apcupsd) that
> > links against libsupc++.a directly
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
CC: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
We've been hitt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70560
--- Comment #7 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> (In reply to James Hilliard from comment #5)
> > That might be somewhere here:
> > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/3be/
> > 3bedf404de0ea42ee3ba624cded6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96657
--- Comment #2 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> I think r244051 caused libsupc++.a to depend on libstdc++.so for targets
> that don't support lock-free atomics for int.
Yeah, the current workaround we came
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106263
--- Comment #2 from James Hilliard ---
Should this be backported to the gcc 12 branch?
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 53510
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53510&action=edit
bug report output
Running into this on master with the following patc
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
GCC BTF Generation appears to not be working correctly for bpf_link_fops in the
bpf test test_ksyms.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #1 from James Hilliard ---
Getting a different error when running with:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/gcc/patch/20220901195340.10653-1-david.fa...@oracle.com/
GCC gen object failure:
$ /home/buildroot/bpf-next-test/tools/test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #2 from James Hilliard ---
Testing with this patch:
diff --git a/gcc/btfout.cc b/gcc/btfout.cc
index 37ec662c190..ff08d0c5024 100644
--- a/gcc/btfout.cc
+++ b/gcc/btfout.cc
@@ -345,6 +345,8 @@ btf_collect_datasec (ctf_container_ref c
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf test(bpf_cubic.c)
in bpf-next:
In file included from
/home/buildroo
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf
test(test_core_reloc_existence.c) in bpf-next:
In
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf
tes
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf
test(test_xdp_vlan.c) in bpf-next, I'm not sure if
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
GCC gen object appears to not be working correctly in the bpf test
bpf_dctcp_release.c
GCC gen object failure:
$ /home/buildroot/bpf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107848
--- Comment #1 from James Hilliard ---
Working LLVM BTF Dump:
$ /home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/sbin/bpftool
--debug btf dump file
/home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_dctcp_release.bpf.o
format raw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107846
--- Comment #7 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> Created attachment 53984 [details]
> gcc13-pr107846.patch
>
> Untested fix.
This appears to fix error, the warning is still present:
progs/test_tc_tunnel.c: I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107846
--- Comment #10 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> (In reply to James Hilliard from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> > > Created attachment 53984 [details]
> > > gcc13-pr107846.patc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #5 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to David Faust from comment #4)
> Created attachment 53993 [details]
> proposed patch
>
> Should fix the remaining issues with 'extern' linkage and the missing
> 'const' modifier (and includes th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #6 from James Hilliard ---
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/v6.1-rc7/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_legacy.h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #7 from James Hilliard ---
There's also this error during skeleton generation for kfunc_call_test.c:
$ /home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/sbin/bpftool
--debug gen skeleton
/home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #10 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to David Faust from comment #9)
> Created attachment 54002 [details]
> updated patch
>
> Update the 'extern' variable marking, and also mark 'extern' funcs.
That fixes the issue in kfunc_call_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #11 from James Hilliard ---
Also hitting this one in cgroup_hierarchical_stats.c:
$ /home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/sbin/bpftool
--debug gen skeleton
/home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #12 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to James Hilliard from comment #10)
> (In reply to David Faust from comment #9)
> > Created attachment 54002 [details]
> > updated patch
> >
> > Update the 'extern' variable marking, and also ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #14 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to David Faust from comment #13)
> Created attachment 54017 [details]
> DATASEC entries for extern funcs
>
> Applies on top of 54002: updated patch
> Adds emission of DATASEC entries for extern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106773
--- Comment #16 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to David Faust from comment #15)
> Created attachment 54021 [details]
> [v2] DATASEC entries for extern funcs
>
> v2 fixes an off-by-one bug introduced in the patch which was causing
> libbpf: I
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this failure in GCC which does not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107983
--- Comment #1 from James Hilliard ---
Working LLVM btf dump:
$ /home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/sbin/bpftool
--debug btf dump file
/home/buildroot/bpf-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/task_kfunc_success.bpf.linked3.o
f
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this error which does not occur in llvm for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108189
--- Comment #2 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The error is correct at least for C before C23.
Hmm, seeing it with -std=gnu2x passed still:
/home/buildroot/opt/cross/bin/bpf-gcc -g -Werror -D__TARGET_ARCH_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108189
--- Comment #8 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Yes the warning is really still correct even if a closer testcase would be:
> ```
> int f(struct {int t;} *b)
> {
> return b->t;
> }
>
> int f1(void *a)
> {
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108189
--- Comment #9 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Also Clang does not implement this warning at all.
>
> It is a bug in bpf-next really.
What would be the correct way to fix these in bpf-next?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108189
--- Comment #11 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The error is correct at least for C before C23.
Can you clarify where exactly in the C23 specification that this will be
allowed?
ty: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this gen object error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf
test(tcp_ca_write_sk_pacing.c) in bpf-
iority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this gen object error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf
test(which uses both linked_vars1.c and linked_vars2.c) in bpf-next.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: james.hilliard1 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm seeing this gen object error which does not occur in llvm for a bpf
test(which uses both lin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109256
--- Comment #2 from James Hilliard ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Even a bad input should cause an error reported rather than a double free.
> So you should at least report it to libbpf too
libbpf bug report:
https://lore.ker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109256
James Hilliard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
38 matches
Mail list logo
