From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 20D073858C3A; Wed,  1 Nov 2023 09:56:59 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 20D073858C3A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1698832619;
	bh=X6jdb42y0A6As/jrmx11KKF1kXqPRR0rJwaDEo3Uehw=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=aKmfy4bg8fINVc+/hW4LVkDRkPZVmexUvgfOjP8SwaO/+CoRybe6GQnMTX3W+WHPw
	 ANRL1/SmgJS8zRZC0pVxduNsyYl2AikHdNMOjpGAr5tdQHTj7s8yImVmR/BT8c/xWj
	 RJuuCRNs67JZSVvk3PB0dvCuDr5qmRBqp7AYgqs4=
From: "xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/112330] [14 Regression] LoongArch: LTO bootstrap failure
 with GAS 2.41
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2023 09:56:58 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 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: <bug-112330-4-Qkv79zhweW@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112330-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112330-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D112330

--- Comment #8 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to chenglulu from comment #7)

> Uh, I also thought about this gcc and binutils matching issue when I
> submitted r14-4674, but I didn't think about whether this should be solve=
d?
> How to fix it=EF=BC=9F

I'm not sure either.

The easiest way is just claiming we need Binutils 2.42 for GCC 14 (document=
ing
this in "Host/target specific installation notes for GCC", install.texi).

If we want to maintain the compatibility with 2.41, I think the best soluti=
on
would be probing the capability of GAS and disable relaxation by default if
necessary.

There is already another issue breaking relaxation with Binutils 2.41 anywa=
y:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30944. Mengqinggang has p=
osted
a fix at https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-October/129941.html=
 but
it's still under testing. Hopefully the fix will be committed before Binuti=
ls
2.42 freeze.=