[Bug testsuite/52945] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[Bug testsuite/52945] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

             Bug #: 52945
           Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble,
                    -O* -flto *
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: testsuite
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: dominiq@lps.ens.fr
                CC: hubicka@gcc.gnu.org, iains@gcc.gnu.org
              Host: x86_64-apple-darwin10
            Target: x86_64-apple-darwin10
             Build: x86_64-apple-darwin10


On x86_64-apple-darwin10 the test gcc.dg/lto/pr52634* introduced in revision
186252 fails:

FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O0 -flto
-flto-partition=none 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o link -O0
-flto -flto-partition=none 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o execute -O0
-flto -flto-partition=none 
FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O2 -flto
-flto-partition=none 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o link -O2
-flto -flto-partition=none 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o execute -O2
-flto -flto-partition=none 
FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O0 -flto
-flto-partition=1to1 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o link -O0
-flto -flto-partition=1to1 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o execute -O0
-flto -flto-partition=1to1 
FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O2 -flto
-flto-partition=1to1 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o link -O2
-flto -flto-partition=1to1 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o execute -O2
-flto -flto-partition=1to1 
FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O0 -flto 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o link -O0
-flto 
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o execute -O0
-flto 
FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O2 -flto
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o link -O2
-flto
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o-c_lto_pr52634_1.o execute -O2
-flto

The failure is

Executing on host: /opt/gcc/build_w/gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/build_w/gcc/ 
-fno-diagnostics-show-caret  -O0 -flto -flto-partition=none   -c  -m32 -o
c_lto_pr52634_0.o /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c   
(timeout = 300)
PASS: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_0.o assemble, -O0 -flto
-flto-partition=none
Executing on host: /opt/gcc/build_w/gcc/xgcc -B/opt/gcc/build_w/gcc/ 
-fno-diagnostics-show-caret  -O0 -flto -flto-partition=none   -c  -m32 -o
c_lto_pr52634_1.o /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_1.c   
(timeout = 300)
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_1.c:2:12: error: only weak
aliases are supported in this configuration
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_1.c:2:12: error: only weak
aliases are supported in this configuration
compiler exited with status 1

This test should probably skipped on platforms that are not supporting weak
aliases.

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2012-04-12 09:56:44 UTC ---
Indeed, it should be tested only when weak aliases are supposed. There is some
dg trick for that...

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2012-04-12 14:26:04 UTC ---
> Indeed, it should be tested only when weak aliases are supposed. There is some
> dg trick for that...

Which one between '/* { dg-require-alias "" } */' and '/* { dg-require-weak ""
} */'?
Note also that I don't have any write access.

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2012-06-18 11:47:57 UTC ---
Using dg-require-weak does not fix the failures, but the test is skipped with
the following patch:

--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c    2012-04-10
08:58:02.000000000 +0200
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c    2012-06-17 15:37:54.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+/* { dg-require-alias "" } */
 /* { dg-lto-do link } */
 /* { dg-lto-options {{-flto -r -nostdlib -flto-partition=1to1}} */
 extern int cfliteValueCallBacks;

Is it the RIGHT way to fix this PR?

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Target|x86_64-apple-darwin10       |*-apple-darwin*
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-09-23
                 CC|                            |howarth at bromo dot
                   |                            |med.uc.edu
               Host|x86_64-apple-darwin10       |*-apple-darwin*
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
              Build|x86_64-apple-darwin10       |*-apple-darwin*

--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2012-09-23 21:45:59 UTC ---
I have the following patch in my tree for some time now

    PR gcc/52945
    * testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c: skip the test on Darwin.

--- /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c    2012-04-10
08:58:02.000000000 +0200
+++ /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c    2012-06-19
15:09:29.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
+/* { dg-require-weak "" } */
+/* { dg-require-alias "" } */
 /* { dg-lto-do link } */
 /* { dg-lto-options {{-flto -r -nostdlib -flto-partition=1to1}} */
 extern int cfliteValueCallBacks;

tested on powerpc-apple-darwin9 and x86_64-apple-darwin10.

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[hubicka at ucw dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2012-10-04 14:16:15 UTC ---
> I have the following patch in my tree for some time now
> 
>     PR gcc/52945
>     * testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c: skip the test on Darwin.
> 
> --- /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c    2012-04-10
> 08:58:02.000000000 +0200
> +++ /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c    2012-06-19
> 15:09:29.000000000 +0200
> @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
> +/* { dg-require-weak "" } */
> +/* { dg-require-alias "" } */

yes, this looks right.  The patch is OK.

Honza

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-10-23 14:59:10 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Tue Oct 23 14:59:02 2012
New Revision: 192716

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192716
Log:


    PR gcc/52945
    * testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c: skip the test on Darwin.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/pr52634_0.c

[Bug testsuite/52945] FAIL: gcc.dg/lto/pr52634 c_lto_pr52634_1.o assemble, -O* -flto *

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52945

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2012-10-27 14:36:41 UTC ---
Thanks for the commit. Closing.