public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug bootstrap/45612]  New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
@ 2010-09-09 10:28 ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-09 10:29 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (6 more replies)
  0 siblings, 7 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-09 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

Between 20100903 and 20100908, mainline bootstrap with Ada started failing when
compiling the 32-bit g-debpoo.adb:

% /var/gcc/gcc-4.6.0-20100908/11-gcc-gas/./gcc/xgcc
-B/var/gcc/gcc-4.6.0-20100908/11-gcc-gas/./gcc/
-B/usr/local/sparc-sun-solaris2.11/bin/ -B/usr/local/sparc-sun-solaris2.11/lib/
-isystem /usr/local/sparc-sun-solaris2.11/include -isystem
/usr/local/sparc-sun-solaris2.11/sys-include    -c -g -O2  -fPIC  -W -Wall
-gnatpg   g-debpoo.adb -o g-debpoo.o -save-temps
g-debpoo.s: Assembler messages:
g-debpoo.s:5362: Error: undefined symbol `.LL363' in operation
g-debpoo.s:5363: Error: undefined symbol `.LL363' in operation


-- 
           Summary: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building
                    libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.6.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: bootstrap
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
 GCC build triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2*
  GCC host triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2*
GCC target triplet: sparc-sun-solaris2*


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-09 10:29 ` ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-09 11:09 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (5 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-09 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-09 10:29 -------
Created an attachment (id=21749)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21749&action=view)
assembler output


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-09 10:29 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-09 11:09 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-10 13:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-09 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-09 11:09 -------
This compiled fine on 20100907 for me.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-09 10:29 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-09 11:09 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-10 13:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-10 15:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-10 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



-- 

rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.6.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-09-10 13:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-10 15:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
  2010-09-10 15:19 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE @ 2010-09-10 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE  2010-09-10 15:15 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no
Solaris 2/SPARC

A reghunt identified that the regression was caused by this patch:

2010-09-07  Jan Hubicka  <jh@suse.cz>

        * tree-inline.c (tree_inlinable_function_p): Do not test
DECL_REPLACEABL
E_P.
        * ipa-inline.c (cgraph_default_inline_p, update_caller_keys,
update_call
ee_keys,
        cgraph_decide_inlining): Test function availability.
        * cif-code.def (OVERWRITABLE): New code.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-09-10 15:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
@ 2010-09-10 15:19 ` ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-12 13:06 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-17  8:56 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-10 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #4 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-10 15:19 -------
Jan, could you please have a look.


-- 

ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
            Summary|[4.6 regression] Reference  |[4.6 regression] Reference
                   |to undefined label building |to undefined label building
                   |libada no Solaris 2/SPARC   |libada on Solaris 2/SPARC


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-09-10 15:19 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-12 13:06 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-09-17  8:56 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-09-12 13:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-12 13:06 -------
*** Bug 45639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |danglin at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
  2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (5 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-09-12 13:06 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-09-17  8:56 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE @ 2010-09-17  8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE  2010-09-17 08:55 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on
Solaris 2/SPARC

> ------- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-16 20:57 -------
> This is really strange case. The patch should at most introduce extra inlining
> that naturally should not introduce undefined symbols.
> It is used as:
>         sethi   %hi(_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_-(.LL363-.)), %o3
>         or      %o3, %lo(_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_-(.LL363-.)), %o3
>         call    gnat__debug_pools__put_line, 0
>
> so it is passed to gnat__debug_pools__put_line.  Any idea what should be there?
> It does not seem like variable, rather like code label. Can I have

Unfortunately not; you'd have to ask one of the Ada maintainers.  Eric
is on the Cc:, he might know.

> -fdump-tree-optimized (or perhaps better -fdump-tree-all) dumps?

Sure.  I couldn't attach it to the PR (1.8 MB even compressed with
bzip2), so I've put it at

http://www.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de/~ro/files/g-debpoo-dump-tree-all.tar.bz2

Thanks.
        Rainer


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-09-17  8:56 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-09-09 10:28 [Bug bootstrap/45612] New: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-09 10:29 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-09 11:09 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-10 13:25 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-10 15:15 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE
2010-09-10 15:19 ` [Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on " ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-12 13:06 ` danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-17  8:56 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).