From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-289061-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5498 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2011 21:41:40 -0000
Received: (qmail 5488 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Apr 2011 21:41:39 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.6 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from cantor.suse.de (HELO mx1.suse.de) (195.135.220.2)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 21:41:35 +0000
Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.221.2])	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))	(No client certificate requested)	by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C681D8FEA2;	Fri,  8 Apr 2011 23:41:33 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 21:41:00 -0000
From: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
To: Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,	Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix LTO bootstrap on i686-linux (problem with two Ldebug_info0 labels; PR bootstrap/48148)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1104082312400.810@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1104082339220.1989@wotan.suse.de>
References: <20110405141939.GB17079@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <4D9F4CB6.2010004@redhat.com> <20110408191125.GV17079@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1104082312400.810@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-IsSubscribed: yes
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
X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg00665.txt.bz2

Hi,

On Fri, 8 Apr 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:

> > > Sounds like this comment needs to be updated if there can be types 
> > > on the list as well.
> > 
> > On a closer look, this seems to be because LTO messes up types 
> > terribly, struct cpp_options's lang field doesn't have enum c_lang 
> > type, but enum prec whose TYPE_CONTEXT is c_parser_binary_expression 
> > function from c_parser.c.  So when trying to create DIE for 
> > cpp_options and stuff in it we end up with the surprising limbo die. 
> > Therefore, I'm withdrawing my patch and will look into this mess on 
> > Monday.
> 
> We are definitely unifying enum types too eagerly.  It's on my TODO to 
> fix that, but it had low priority sofar.

It's too eager "only" for debug info, and that is in a suboptimal state 
for LTO anyway.  early-debug-info will fix all of our problems.  ahem :-)


Ciao,
Michael.