From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 bootstrap comparison failure gcc 11.3.0 and 10.4.0
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2022 14:20:38 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d15a8ecc-6eb4-2e84-9c14-bfe9d6985d53@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63233E3D-4AFA-4BA9-9596-350402ACE097@gmail.com>
On 7/19/2022 9:25 AM, Dennis Grevenstein via Gcc-help wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have tried to build either gcc 10.4.0 or 11.3.0 on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11.
> Both produce the same error and fail at the comparison step:
>
> Comparing stages 2 and 3
> warning: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/libgcc/lib2funcs_s.o differs
> warning: hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/libgcc/lib2funcs.o differs
> Bootstrap comparison failure!
> gcc/analyzer/diagnostic-manager.o differs
> gcc/analyzer/feasible-graph.o differs
> gcc/analyzer/program-point.o differs
> gcc/analyzer/engine.o differs
> gcc/analyzer/sm-signal.o differs
> gcc/analyzer/trimmed-graph.o differs
> gcc/calls.o differs
> gcc/cgraph.o differs
> gcc/ipa-comdats.o differs
> gcc/ipa-visibility.o differs
> gcc/ipa-inline-transform.o differs
> gcc/ipa-predicate.o differs
> gcc/ipa-ref.o differs
> make[2]: *** [Makefile:23872: compare] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory '/usr/local/compile/gcc-11.3.0bin‘
>
>
> I am using gcc 9.5.0 to bootstrap:
[ ... ]
So the way we end up having to debug this stuff is to compare the
resulting code in the files that differ and where/why they differ. Given
that the PA/HP-UX isn't a common target anymore, it's entirely possible
something has gone wonky. I know John David Anglin does build it
semi-regularly, maybe he has some insight. My tester only builds 32bit
PA Linux, so it's not particularly helpful.
It might be something in the debug sections, in which case bootstrapping
without -g should get you over the hump. It might also be a problem
where -g is impacting the resulting code generation (that's not supposed
to happen, but does), and again bootstrapping without -g should get you
over the hump.
It may also be the case that there's a codegen issue in gcc-9.5.0 that
affects building gcc-10 and gcc-11. I think it's pretty unlikely to be
a binutils problem.
So the first step is to look at those files and see where they differ.
Do they differ in the contents of the text section or is it something else?
jeff
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-30 20:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-19 15:25 Dennis Grevenstein
2022-07-22 3:17 ` Matthew R. Wilson
2022-07-30 20:20 ` Jeff Law [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d15a8ecc-6eb4-2e84-9c14-bfe9d6985d53@gmail.com \
--to=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).