* does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly?
@ 1998-02-16 11:44 Robert Lipe
1998-02-16 14:21 ` H.J. Lu
1998-02-18 2:42 ` Alexandre Oliva
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Robert Lipe @ 1998-02-16 11:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: egcs
Can one of you guys with a current EGCS on Linux try something for me?
I haven't been able to do a 'make check' for over a month, and I'm trying
to figure out if something is broken on other x86 elf/unix targets, or if
it's unique to OpenServer. I also can't tell if I'm just the only one
masochistic enough to make another pass over all the testsuites with -fPIC
or not. When I last ran the tests around mid Jan, this didn't happen.
In your gcc directory, type
make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC old-deja.exp=eh*"
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 66
# of unexpected failures 37
/home/play/negcs/gcc/testsuite/../xgcc version egcs-2.91.08 980214 (gcc-2.8.0 re
lease)
If I lose the -fPIC, I see much better numbers.
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 103
It looks like all the EH tests with -fPIC drop core.
--
Robert Lipe http://www.dgii.com/people/robertl robertl@dgii.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly?
1998-02-16 11:44 does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly? Robert Lipe
@ 1998-02-16 14:21 ` H.J. Lu
1998-02-16 14:21 ` Robert Lipe
1998-02-18 2:42 ` Alexandre Oliva
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 1998-02-16 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Lipe; +Cc: egcs
>
> In your gcc directory, type
>
> make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC old-deja.exp=eh*"
>
> === g++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 66
> # of unexpected failures 37
> /home/play/negcs/gcc/testsuite/../xgcc version egcs-2.91.08 980214 (gcc-2.8.0 re
> lease)
>
>
# make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC old-deja.exp=eh*"
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 102
# of untested testcases 1
/home/work/gnu/bin/egcs/gcc/testsuite/../xgcc version egcs-2.90.24 980208 (egcs-1.0.2 prerelease)
It looks fine on linux. I have been working with egcs 1.0.2. I haven't
built egcs for a few days now.
--
H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.org)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly?
1998-02-16 14:21 ` H.J. Lu
@ 1998-02-16 14:21 ` Robert Lipe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Robert Lipe @ 1998-02-16 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: egcs
[ OpenServer, EGCS from 0216 ]
> > make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC old-deja.exp=eh*"
> >
> > === g++ Summary ===
> >
> > # of expected passes 66
> > # of unexpected failures 37
> # make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC old-deja.exp=eh*"
>
> === g++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 102
> # of untested testcases 1
> /home/work/gnu/bin/egcs/gcc/testsuite/../xgcc version egcs-2.90.24 980208 (egcs-1.0.2 prerelease)
>
> It looks fine on linux. I have been working with egcs 1.0.2. I haven't
> built egcs for a few days now.
Thanx for the sanity test, H.J.
When I do the same in my 1.0.2 tree, I almost see the same thing you see.
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 103
/home/play/egcs-release/native/gcc/testsuite/../xgcc version egcs-2.90.24 980208
(egcs-1.0.2 prerelease)
I better go do some digging here...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly?
1998-02-18 2:42 ` Alexandre Oliva
@ 1998-02-18 2:42 ` Robert Lipe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Robert Lipe @ 1998-02-18 2:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Oliva; +Cc: egcs
> > I'm trying to figure out if something is broken on other x86
> > elf/unix targets, or if it's unique to OpenServer. I also can't
> > tell if I'm just the only one masochistic enough to make another
> > pass over all the testsuites with -fPIC or not.
>
> I used to do that myself, but when we got `make check', I started
> to use it, and it would not run tests with `-fPIC'. Perhaps a nice
It will do it, but it takes some non-obvious voodoo.
> addition to egcs's makefiles would be a full-check, that would test
> all multilibs with and without -fPIC, if -fPIC makes a difference.
The magic syntax is:
make -k check \
RUNTESTFLAGS="--outdir ${OUT} --target_board 'unix{-mcoff,-melf,-fPIC}'"
the --outdir is just so that I can keep a history of when things passed
or failed. The --target_board stuff loops over each of the three sets
of flags. Even though -melf is the default on my target, I explictly
call it out here so that the reports are more readable.
I imagine that it would be possible to wire the output of a
(robertl) rjlhome:/play/negcs/gcc
$ ./xgcc -B./ --print-multi-lib /tmp/x.c
.;
coff;@mcoff
pic;@fPIC
into the list of options to be passed into target_board.
> I just don't know how to test whether -fPIC makes a difference in a
> portable way, is there any way?
If there is, the testsuites need to be taught about it becuase one of my
multilibs (ELF) will do -fPIC and one (COFF) won't and the testsuites
that explictly pass -fPIC fail.
> > make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC
> > old-deja.exp=eh*"
>
> Done, all tests passed on i586-pc-linux-gnu, with egcs-980214,
> binutils-2.8.1.0.18, out-of-the-box RedHat 5.0.
Bummer. This means I'll get less sympathy that it's broken. :-(
Thanx for checking, Alexandre.
RJL
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly?
1998-02-16 11:44 does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly? Robert Lipe
1998-02-16 14:21 ` H.J. Lu
@ 1998-02-18 2:42 ` Alexandre Oliva
1998-02-18 2:42 ` Robert Lipe
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Oliva @ 1998-02-18 2:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Lipe; +Cc: egcs
Robert Lipe writes:
> I'm trying
> to figure out if something is broken on other x86 elf/unix targets, or if
> it's unique to OpenServer. I also can't tell if I'm just the only one
> masochistic enough to make another pass over all the testsuites with -fPIC
> or not.
I used to do that myself, but when we got `make check', I started to
use it, and it would not run tests with `-fPIC'. Perhaps a nice
addition to egcs's makefiles would be a full-check, that would test
all multilibs with and without -fPIC, if -fPIC makes a difference. I
just don't know how to test whether -fPIC makes a difference in a
portable way, is there any way?
> make check-g++ RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts -fPIC old-deja.exp=eh*"
Done, all tests passed on i586-pc-linux-gnu, with egcs-980214,
binutils-2.8.1.0.18, out-of-the-box RedHat 5.0.
--
Alexandre Oliva
mailto:oliva@dcc.unicamp.br mailto:aoliva@acm.org
http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1998-02-18 2:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1998-02-16 11:44 does linux -fPIC/eh do so poorly? Robert Lipe
1998-02-16 14:21 ` H.J. Lu
1998-02-16 14:21 ` Robert Lipe
1998-02-18 2:42 ` Alexandre Oliva
1998-02-18 2:42 ` Robert Lipe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).