From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vk1-xa2f.google.com (mail-vk1-xa2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a2f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5010938A1408 for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 13:29:20 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 5010938A1408 Received: by mail-vk1-xa2f.google.com with SMTP id f126so6962404vke.3 for ; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 06:29:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=Z8/nHBExZ9RdVLfpcqsEGj3/F6iMn7k7taHqdyV5pAU=; b=JuyiFdM0B2NRuO49erPnJXs0lJKgkXk8jAkraHMjVcYxbs3zawJji4362QZB7TFeJf DVubHQEaULwMiZGOkdLUcAsuUugNyBPq3aWRanwT+1GgiCwankwUjO6ieTEo0OK3xV8Z RNcdgtNA6cnJ86ADSopCMkMKd2TT7M+QpaUk5Z5WKi3wYznlNc4fa+5RTeRJEl2yaS1o Ox4+4AsZJ6gqkwfPUjlA7R1ijPRdjwtDxO9AxdgnnaeSmSe3pakEbHtEBRBSn9N++AVq aPj1i1a4UPcGO5LFIIqXUo+LewFnv0j0cTKzCXCfg3DWHBorTnWi1tCKmmcQDTaort1w M9uA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531bP9DPSbXmiGn/+heZ0bOoLJLlyCGS/EbeTJThDcb1N8SW2lfl jqt2ZJKF1qyNYE+OKGdN7DRPTq6gBJw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz0j5oTGS0V1A1O2/ScnSEyb6VinubDXHp+iX+DKC9YyJdqeXCCymfLpV4Gntx4HfyvXQpe2A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:1681:: with SMTP id 1mr14899042vkl.9.1633354159663; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 06:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.31.0.175] (c-98-202-48-222.hsd1.ut.comcast.net. [98.202.48.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z26sm1269322vkn.36.2021.10.04.06.29.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Oct 2021 06:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve jump threading dump output. To: Aldy Hernandez Cc: GCC patches , Andrew MacLeod References: <20210928094545.889111-1-aldyh@redhat.com> <9f2db536-c182-426e-05d5-0242d9a109f1@gmail.com> <25abc6f7-8006-5cf5-95bf-bd752a46e9ea@redhat.com> <958ea75d-b67d-1064-0c32-f788003c758c@gmail.com> From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <979f4d53-9aab-379b-d294-2dd4416414a2@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 07:29:15 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, KAM_SHORT, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:29:21 -0000 On 10/4/2021 6:05 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 8:26 PM Jeff Law wrote: > >> So I'm really wondering if these were caused by that patch you'd sent me >> privately for the visium issue. Right now we're regressing in a few >> places, but it's not bad. >> >> visium & bfin are the only embedded targets failing. >> >> visium fails: >> Tests that now fail, but worked before (9 tests): >> >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/960218-1.c -Os (test for excess errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/961125-1.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer >> -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions (test for >> excess errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/961125-1.c -O3 -g (test for excess >> errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pending-4.c -O1 (test for excess >> errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c -O2 (test for excess errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c -O2 -flto >> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none (test for excess errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c -O2 -flto >> -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects (test for excess errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c -O3 -g (test for excess >> errors) >> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68911.c -O1 (test for excess errors) >> >> We've already discussed 960218-1 a bit. I wouldn't be surprised if >> they're all the same problem in the end. These started with: > Is this still an issue? I'm having some trouble reproducing it. > > I tried building a combined tree with adapted instructions from here > (dunno if they still apply): > > https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Building_Cross_Toolchains_with_gcc > > Building visium-sim fails with: > > BFD does not support target visium-sim-none. > > Building visium-elf or even bfin-elf has libctf compile errors. > > Instead, I tried just building cc1 for both visium and bfin but I > don't get any *compilation* errors from the above tests. I'm assuming > compilation errors since they say "test for excess errors". Are they > compilation errors? > > If this is still an issue, is there an easy way to reproduce? For the visium stuff, look for a call to abort () in the resulting assembly code of 960218-1.  Due to the newlib/libgloss bug on the visum port, any call to abort () results in a link error which triggers the excess errors failure. Jeff