From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 91619 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2017 22:21:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 91394 invoked by uid 89); 8 Dec 2017 22:21:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mail-pf0-f169.google.com Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-pf0-f169.google.com) (209.85.192.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 22:21:32 +0000 Received: by mail-pf0-f169.google.com with SMTP id j124so8217251pfc.2 for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 14:21:31 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=gERQcy4pN/zJ5NNSr6cmnP9kCEX0WsNYJUlZFutp/5E=; b=qm3hfKYFUlSNixsiSGdk9ofMkkgbyZKlqcWvuM6EE0AhEwLioKBFI3Jdg8flGyMmbt NUkwPwsFzFqeNa1HfBEbXATsYvDnn+mLLmyJ6mkteQhyGQp6iFDHKDp9zBPIQ6n2Kx2c PYJL/PuZ3xdP7YnP/9JLjyuzUygNgmeBzXT/K5G+ox/du5PnDxau9mZghzIDGq5Hv7PJ ZMj4QN5EkppBL8E8cwBMI8SeYopK8ep3jfwTUfe1F7QHz1PO0O4HkVdbNJ/q/L1f5cqV 51LHSSU+FqdHgiERDqBiJPj/TF/eaDHzzuteoZGp6GVM2ZyofaCkcDFEeiOq6zBqgbLU Eesg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6D5DBlZvWF0pzL/N6lF0WdkfhZRiACvd4HMyrpLIGisXGuwUdc y7ZRSqnsZ3uSGBirBtjeEZo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMaAzvUqu6h6ulcjFPzRjU1ck8sSh0M33HpjbKHm7jylEMIeZS8gGH3hOZ9FLNmmVfeFtOXyKg== X-Received: by 10.84.209.136 with SMTP id y8mr31940780plh.439.1512771690578; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 14:21:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org (CPE-58-175-244-173.hdcz1.win.bigpond.net.au. [58.175.244.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j79sm15795652pfe.129.2017.12.08.14.21.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Dec 2017 14:21:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C744FC0728; Sat, 9 Dec 2017 08:51:25 +1030 (ACDT) Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 22:21:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Kyrill Tkachov Cc: "nickc@redhat.com" , "binutils@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Enable shared lib tests for frv, lm32, m32r, microblaze, nds32 and or1k Message-ID: <20171208222125.GA11374@bubble.grove.modra.org> References: <20171206072555.GC13179@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20171207095040.GI13179@bubble.grove.modra.org> <5A2AD4A3.3040006@foss.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5A2AD4A3.3040006@foss.arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00084.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 06:06:27PM +0000, Kyrill Tkachov wrote: > I'm seeing 202 unexpected failures on aarch64-none-elf with this patch. > With errors telling me to recompile with -fPIC or > "newlib/libgloss/aarch64/syscalls.c:639:(.text._sbrk+0x6c): dangerous > relocation: unsupported relocation" > Should the tests perhaps be skipped on a bare-metal target? aarch64-none-elf uses ld/emulparams/aarch64elf.em, which enables shared lib and PIE support. So it seems to me that shared lib support ought to be tested.. If the aarch64-elf environment never provides the necessary shared libs for these tests to pass, I think you'd be better off disabling the ld shared lib support. If you sometimes do have shared libs, then the situation isn't much different to one I hit on powerpc linux occasionally: People report testsuite failures due to not having static libraries installed. Well, that's the purist argument. Pragmatic considerations might say otherwise. I'm fine with putting an exception into check_shared_lib_support for aarch64-*-elf if that's what target maintainers decide. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM