From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17715 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2012 05:44:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 17706 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jun 2012 05:44:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_OV,TW_VQ,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-pz0-f47.google.com) (209.85.210.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 05:43:53 +0000 Received: by dalh21 with SMTP id h21so9421185dal.20 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:43:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=KJWloqwVZWZbWZ/5D1/HAbLVSjVeskMqolRf6KuQKpg=; b=K/yIEyZ5YEgcRMPVr6i31qcDCDK6Kf7/UANqJR3+nY1tYL+BS/ufCeMwDzpP2MyPV4 SbD3phjRvx8QiO/+KdhqCOzwQEyn1Q0Lu4PwYJ3uyod8Gyo32Nekoydygl2OtA5mGEJy k1kXOtVbrImyjSs6SXsIN50AbORJFqYIBmXuMfqi/6dPBHduSaDTQCg0B5dEnibUjGw1 KUn0JSikPDIL3JAV67rnQzNJ8dfNgUIoT8RIrtP+s8vvvxA+R0TlZ8hyyegb5GgdfuWr P+GJFpzfe6XNShwz188L75qrCgVffUi79WAddJ9mw9H7KazsGcuyuPSOi4zjVFzyX0vK 9F/A== Received: by 10.68.232.170 with SMTP id tp10mr2084609pbc.59.1340171032336; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:43:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.232.170 with SMTP id tp10mr2084594pbc.59.1340171032266; Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:43:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from coign.google.com ([216.239.45.130]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pg3sm30638066pbc.2.2012.06.19.22.43.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:43:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Ian Lance Taylor To: "Deepti Sharma" Cc: , "'damodar.sonone'" Subject: Re: upgrading gcc-4.4.0 to gcc-4.7.0:configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile References: <34003613.post@talk.nabble.com> <34003766.post@talk.nabble.com> <34003806.post@talk.nabble.com> <4fe160f0.e5c4440a.5b5d.75c1@mx.google.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 05:44:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4fe160f0.e5c4440a.5b5d.75c1@mx.google.com> (Deepti Sharma's message of "Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:04:19 +0530") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm1EdRZ83GHNkxoOdLPjQNIrHqGcweb/wJ4XHLm58iNwXpoRbXAQBt6ItWCgSeO+w67yX1Ma9alHg5Rg2eBXLlM/V8xvw3Ee3nniKqnEOaIkr7h7CPKeS2+I/PuMLcgvuSlvRmwITp38URTE/Fo/qzLNSJEEw== X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-06/txt/msg00180.txt.bz2 "Deepti Sharma" writes: > After battling with this error for several hours, I was able to resolve this > error simply by putting my nop instruction pattern as the first pattern. > Initially, I had movqi as my first instruction pattern. Is this some > restriction or a bug in gcc? > ... > Could you please elaborate on this behaviour? I could not find any such > restriction in the gcc documentation. I don't know what the problem is because I don't have any detailed information about the change you made to GCC. There is nothing special about the first insn in the MD file. The only way in which ordering is important is that RTL patterns are matched against insns in order. It's normally a bug if two insns match an RTL pattern, but there are unusual cases where that is desirable, and then order matters. Ian