Re: target/6569: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 C testsuite regression in compile/20011119-2.c

[Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>]

The following reply was made to PR target/6569; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
To: Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com>,
   "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>
Cc: "davem@gcc.gnu.org" <davem@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "davem@redhat.com" <davem@redhat.com>,
   "gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "jakub@redhat.com" <jakub@redhat.com>,
   "nobody@gcc.gnu.org" <nobody@gcc.gnu.org>,
   "rth@redhat.com" <rth@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: target/6569: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 C testsuite regression  in
 compile/20011119-2.c
Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 07:40:55 -0700

 --On Tuesday, May 07, 2002 03:14:49 PM +0200 Franz Sirl 
 <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> wrote:
 
 > At 14:45 07.05.2002, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
 >>  > From: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
 >>  >
 >>  > >> Can you try the attached patch? It seems to work for me, but the
 >>  > >> bootstrap hasn't completed yet. While I was at it, I improved the
 >>  > >> placing of the warning messages. I'm still a bit confused, cause it
 >>  > >> sometimes seems olddecl and newdecl appeared to be swapped
 >>  > >> compared to their sourcefile ordering.
 >>  > >
 >>  > > FYI, bootstrap+regtest on x86-linux-gnu completed successfully.
 >>  >
 >>  > OK; once you have confirmation of the SPARC results go ahead and
 >>  > check it in.
 >>
 >> Unfortunately, the patch did not solve the problem listed in the PR.
 >> I still get the same 'as' errors from compile/20011119-2.c
 >>
 >> compile/20011119-2.c:3: warning: weak declaration of `foo' after first
 >> use  results in unspecified behavior
 >> /usr/ccs/bin/as: "/var/tmp//ccQOIg1d.s", line 51: error: invalid operand
 >> --------------------------------------------------^^^^^
 >
 > Yeah, I managed to get access to a solaris-2.8 machine, even though I
 > wasn't able to bootstrap with Solaris as/ld (see below), I was able to
 > reproduce the failure. Re-checking on x86-linux-gnu revealed that it even
 > doesn't fix the problem there, so I must have mixed something up
 > yesterday. Frankly, I'm a bit at a loss here, cause I've tried several
 > strategies yesterday and they either didn't fix the testcase or caused
 > some of the weak tests to fail. Especially I tried to use the TREE_USED
 > flag of the WEAK_DECLS TREE_LIST to mark when a weak already had been
 > assembled, but it didn't work out :-(. I seem to misunderstand something
 > about how the tree structures are handled.
 
 I'll look into this problem.
 
 Thanks,
 
 --
 Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
 CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com