public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi
@ 2015-02-19 15:06 Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
  2015-02-19 15:54 ` [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm* ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
                   ` (4 more replies)
  0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alex.Velenko at arm dot com @ 2015-02-19 15:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121

            Bug ID: 65121
           Summary: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi
           Product: gcc
           Version: 5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: regression
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
                CC: ramana.radhakrishnan at arm dot com, rth at gcc dot gnu.org
            Target: arm-none-eabi

Patch r220684 changed behaviour of varasm.c:default_binds_local_p, which
affected 
behavior of gcc/config/arm/arm.c:arm_function_in_section_p and through it
breaks gcc/config/arm/arm.c:arm_is_long_call_p for weak symbols.

As a result, I get regression for gcc.target/arm/long-calls-1.c on
arm-none-eabi:
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/long-calls-1.c scan-assembler-not \tbl?\tweak_l1\n
FAIL: gcc.target/arm/long-calls-1.c scan-assembler-not \tbl?\tweak_l3\n

Corresponding mailing thread:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg01114.html


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm*
  2015-02-19 15:06 [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
@ 2015-02-19 15:54 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-02-19 17:27 ` rth at gcc dot gnu.org
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-02-19 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121

Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Target|arm-none-eabi               |arm*
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-02-19
                 CC|                            |ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
          Component|regression                  |target
            Summary|long_call attribute broken  |[5 regression] long_call
                   |weak symbol arm_none_eabi   |attribute broken weak
                   |                            |symbol arm*
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I'd expect this to fail on arm-none-linux-gnueabi(hf) too.

Confirmed.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm*
  2015-02-19 15:06 [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
  2015-02-19 15:54 ` [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm* ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-02-19 17:27 ` rth at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-03-09 14:42 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-02-19 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121

--- Comment #2 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 34808
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34808&action=edit
proposed patch

Also remove a silly test vs TREE_STATIC that is only relevant to
VAR_DECL, not FUNCTION_DECL.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm*
  2015-02-19 15:06 [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
  2015-02-19 15:54 ` [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm* ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-02-19 17:27 ` rth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-03-09 14:42 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-03-09 15:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-03-09 15:20 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-03-09 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1
   Target Milestone|---                         |5.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm*
  2015-02-19 15:06 [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2015-03-09 14:42 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-03-09 15:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-03-09 15:20 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-03-09 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
So, what is the status of testing this?  It passed bootstrap/regtest here for
armv7hl-linux, no regressions.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm*
  2015-02-19 15:06 [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2015-03-09 15:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-03-09 15:20 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
  4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: ramana at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-03-09 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65121

--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: ramana
Date: Mon Mar  9 15:19:20 2015
New Revision: 221282

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221282&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR number for 65121 in Changelog.

PR target/65121

The commit that fixed this was 

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2015-03/msg00140.html



Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2015-03-09 15:20 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-02-19 15:06 [Bug regression/65121] New: long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm_none_eabi Alex.Velenko at arm dot com
2015-02-19 15:54 ` [Bug target/65121] [5 regression] long_call attribute broken weak symbol arm* ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-02-19 17:27 ` rth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-09 14:42 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-09 15:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-09 15:20 ` ramana at gcc dot gnu.org

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).