Re: non-conformant ELF symbol table on MIPS?

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>]

On 28.07.2023 08:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 27.07.2023 21:28, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>>  Determining whether a MIPS target uses the IRIX emulation is complex, see 
>> e.g. how binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/mips/mips.exp sets `irixemul'.  
>> If you provide me with test case details (input and output), then I may be 
>> able to give you further advice,
> 
> I've provided you the input (see context above), and you'll be able to
> generate the object file from it yourself. But I don't see what this
> would bring, when you already indicate that this is "expected" behavior.
> 
>> but otherwise you may want to mark the 
>> test case with `notarget' or suchlike rather than `xfail', because that's 
>> not a bug with the backend that the symbol ordering varies.
> 
> I'm okay making mips*-*-irix* "notarget", but I don't view this as
> appropriate for e.g. mips*-unknown-elf.

Actually you're right, it needs to be notarget, or else we'd see
"unexpected successes" on the other mips*-*-* targets. I'll refer
to irixemul in the accompanying comment.

Jan