From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-450367-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15257 invoked by alias); 2 May 2014 06:12:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15157 invoked by uid 48); 2 May 2014 06:12:36 -0000
From: "davem at davemloft dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug sanitizer/59758] [4.9/4.10 Regression] bootstrap failure in libsanitizer/asan on sparc-linux-gnu
Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 06:12:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: sanitizer
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: davem at davemloft dot net
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.1
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-59758-4-khwStKITSK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-59758-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-59758-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00059.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59758

--- Comment #9 from David S. Miller <davem at davemloft dot net> ---
The next problem you'll run into is that the shmid additions for sparc weren't
done correctly in the patch.  Where you see 's64', it should be 'long', and
where you see 'u64' it should be 'unsigned long'.

I strongly suspect the patch was only build tested on 64-bit, as all of the
mistakes in the patch are for 32-bit cases.