From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 115971 invoked by alias); 7 Apr 2015 13:45:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 115951 invoked by uid 89); 7 Apr 2015 13:45:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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; Tue, 07 Apr 2015 13:45:44 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t37Djhgq004791 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:45:43 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-58.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.58]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t37DjfgM000667 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Apr 2015 09:45:42 -0400 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t37Djeel018374; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:45:40 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id t37Djcu1018090; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 15:45:38 +0200 Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 13:45:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Bill Schmidt Cc: Jonathan Wakely , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, dje.gcc@gmail.com, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH, rs6000, libstdc++] Add baseline_symbols.txt for powerpc64le-linux-gnu Message-ID: <20150407134538.GF19273@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <1428373888.2816.53.camel@gnopaine> <20150407130905.GE19273@tucnak.redhat.com> <20150407131858.GD9755@redhat.com> <1428413977.6000.4.camel@oc8801110288.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1428413977.6000.4.camel@oc8801110288.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg00242.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 08:39:37AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote: > Posted below the differences from powerpc64-linux-gnu. A surprising > number of additional symbols, but none are missing in the new baseline. > (Perhaps powerpc64-linux-gnu needs updating?) Sure, it needs updating. So, if I filter the GLIBCXX_3.4.21 and CXXABI_1.3.9 symbols from your diff, I get grep -v '@@GLIBCXX_3.4.21\|@@CXXABI_1.3.9' /tmp/XX | grep @ > TLS:8:_ZSt11__once_call@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11 > TLS:8:_ZSt15__once_callable@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11 which are the two lines you should manually remove. But then, it means the powerpc64-linux-gnu and powerpc64le-linux-gnu baseline_symbols.txt are identical, so the question is if we really need to duplicate it, instead of just telling in the configury that for powerpc64le-linux-gnu it should use the powerpc64-linux-gnu baseline_symbols.txt. Jakub