From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-379038-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7530 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2014 13:08:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7510 invoked by uid 89); 29 Sep 2014 13:08:36 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:08:36 +0000
Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8TD8XSg011824	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL);	Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:08:33 -0400
Received: from localhost (ovpn-116-66.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.66])	by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s8TD8VL4004040;	Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:08:32 -0400
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:08:00 -0000
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix finding default baseline symbols directory
Message-ID: <20140929130831.GA4197@redhat.com>
References: <87lhp6m52h.fsf@igel.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87lhp6m52h.fsf@igel.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SW-Source: 2014-09/txt/msg02519.txt.bz2

On 26/09/14 23:42 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>Tested on aarch64-suse-linux, where try_cpu=generic.
>
>Andreas.
>
>	* configure.host: Use host_cpu, not try_cpu, to define default
>	abi_baseline_pair.
>---
> libstdc++-v3/configure.host | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/configure.host b/libstdc++-v3/configure.host
>index a12871a..abfd609 100644
>--- a/libstdc++-v3/configure.host
>+++ b/libstdc++-v3/configure.host
>@@ -346,8 +346,8 @@ case "${host}" in
>         abi_baseline_pair=x86_64-linux-gnu
>         ;;
>       *)
>-        if test -d ${glibcxx_srcdir}/config/abi/post/${try_cpu}-linux-gnu; then
>-          abi_baseline_pair=${try_cpu}-linux-gnu
>+        if test -d ${glibcxx_srcdir}/config/abi/post/${host_cpu}-linux-gnu; then
>+          abi_baseline_pair=${host_cpu}-linux-gnu
>         fi
>     esac
>     case "${host}" in

Is this definitely right?

If someone builds a target such as alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu then
try_cpu will be set to alpha by the first case in that file, and so it
will use the alpha-linux-gnu baseline file today, but with your change
it would try to use a alphaev68-linux-gnu baseline file which doesn't
exist.

Would a safer change be to just add a new pattern for aarch64?

--- a/libstdc++-v3/configure.host
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/configure.host
@@ -345,6 +345,9 @@ case "${host}" in
       x86_64)
         abi_baseline_pair=x86_64-linux-gnu
         ;;
+      aarch64)
+        abi_baseline_pair=aarch64-linux-gnu
+        ;;
       *)
         if test -d ${glibcxx_srcdir}/config/abi/post/${try_cpu}-linux-gnu; then
           abi_baseline_pair=${try_cpu}-linux-gnu