public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking)
[not found] <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2021-01-07 10:22 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
2021-01-08 13:59 ` clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: emil at tywoniak dot eu @ 2021-01-07 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83967
Emil Jiří Tywoniak <emil at tywoniak dot eu> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |emil at tywoniak dot eu
--- Comment #16 from Emil Jiří Tywoniak <emil at tywoniak dot eu> ---
Issue is not resolved, and the proposed "moved" fixed issue is a different
issue.
Accidentally reproduced in a project (demo files untested) with GCC 10.1.1 on
Windows (Arm Embedded Toolchain 10 2020-q2-preview). Changing C and asm compile
order works but is not a proper solution
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking)
[not found] <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-01-07 10:22 ` [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking) emil at tywoniak dot eu
@ 2021-01-08 13:59 ` clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-11 14:23 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
2021-01-11 14:36 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: clyon at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-08 13:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83967
Christophe Lyon <clyon at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #17 from Christophe Lyon <clyon at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Any chance you can try with a toolchain using binutils-2.35?
As I indicated in https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+bug/1747966
there's a related bug fix in binutils-2.35, but Arm's 2020-q2 toolchain still
uses 2.34.50.20200226.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking)
[not found] <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-01-07 10:22 ` [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking) emil at tywoniak dot eu
2021-01-08 13:59 ` clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-11 14:23 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
2021-01-11 14:36 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: emil at tywoniak dot eu @ 2021-01-11 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83967
--- Comment #18 from Emil Jiří Tywoniak <emil at tywoniak dot eu> ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #17)
> Any chance you can try with a toolchain using binutils-2.35?
>
> As I indicated in https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+bug/1747966
> there's a related bug fix in binutils-2.35, but Arm's 2020-q2 toolchain
> still uses 2.34.50.20200226.
Issue in my project is not present anymore with 2020 Q4 release, which packs
GNU ld (GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain 10-2020-q4-major) 2.35.1.20201028. Will test
example from Comment #11. My apologies for not reading threads more carefully
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking)
[not found] <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-11 14:23 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
@ 2021-01-11 14:36 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
3 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: emil at tywoniak dot eu @ 2021-01-11 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83967
--- Comment #19 from Emil Jiří Tywoniak <emil at tywoniak dot eu> ---
(In reply to Emil Jiří Tywoniak from comment #18)
> (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #17)
> > Any chance you can try with a toolchain using binutils-2.35?
> >
> > As I indicated in https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+bug/1747966
> > there's a related bug fix in binutils-2.35, but Arm's 2020-q2 toolchain
> > still uses 2.34.50.20200226.
>
> Issue in my project is not present anymore with 2020 Q4 release, which packs
> GNU ld (GNU Arm Embedded Toolchain 10-2020-q4-major) 2.35.1.20201028. Will
> test example from Comment #11. My apologies for not reading threads more
> carefully
I have now tested the bad branch from Comment #11 and did not replicate the bug
with the Q4 toolchain (specifically, the Systick handler in .lst is exactly the
same as in the good branch excerpt in Comment #11)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-11 14:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-83967-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2021-01-07 10:22 ` [Bug lto/83967] LTO removes C functions declared as weak in assembler(depending on files order in linking) emil at tywoniak dot eu
2021-01-08 13:59 ` clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-11 14:23 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
2021-01-11 14:36 ` emil at tywoniak dot eu
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).