From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 34FC63858D20; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:35:47 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 34FC63858D20 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1678869347; bh=LG+ZT/MBGKms+ifwJTW+DaEoF++VB3VFycBnGZKTe4M=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=OA051f9evREblbonFB6Q3C5ctjy2QNst1F20mECBb/mmUg/0JoGGKWLmaaDN31kqf O9ZO+rQC+5zKilj2+q9/GEQLCQ7wku3g8erNc4+5J6QYkpTscohBW5MPHhg2ZfsSgl r9iHXowWbFij5i5To3s24Lik8mhEh0vIKCVZlGmU= From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug driver/109135] Wrong make utility called with LTO testsuite Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:35:41 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: driver X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: lto X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109135 --- Comment #6 from Richard Biener --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #4) > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:36:27PM +0000, sgk at troutmask dot > apl.washington.edu wrote: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D109135 > >=20 > > --- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl --- > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:25:53PM +0000, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wr= ote: > > >=20 > > > --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- > > > This is not a testsuite issue but rather the issue is the lto code is= calling > > > make ... > > >=20 > >=20 > > That explains why groping around in gcc/testsuite for > > a rogue make or MAKE was coming up empty. > >=20 > > I'm in the middle of doing a serial 'gmake check-fortran', > > which takes a long time on my system. Is there a way > > to invoke only lto testing? >=20 > So, 'gmake check-fortran' finishes without any lto issues. > It seems one must invoke the checking with 'gmake -j6 check-fortran' > to get failures. >=20 > Looking in obj/gcc/Makefile at line 341 I see the comment >=20 > # Make sure the $(MAKE) variable is defined. >=20 > followed by no checking to see if MAKE is defined. Makefile.in has # Make sure the $(MAKE) variable is defined. @SET_MAKE@ configure has if eval test \$ac_cv_prog_make_${ac_make}_set =3D yes; then { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: result: yes" >&5 $as_echo "yes" >&6; } SET_MAKE=3D else { $as_echo "$as_me:${as_lineno-$LINENO}: result: no" >&5 $as_echo "no" >&6; } SET_MAKE=3D"MAKE=3D${MAKE-make}" fi from AC_PROG_MAKE_SET which seems to check whether make sets $MAKE. That appearantly succeeds for you. Do you "properly" do sth like MAKE=3Dgmake ../configure so configure sees which make you are using? I think if your gmake doesn't set it then even recursive configure invocations from gmake will resort to 'make' but then I _think_ that gmake itself sets $MAKE (if it was not set?) for sub-processes. But maybe only if it thinks its recursive make?=