From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21B7A3892456 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:14:47 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 21B7A3892456 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-332-8Ww9mZnGPGSBphoKQ4C4yg-1; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 11:14:44 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 8Ww9mZnGPGSBphoKQ4C4yg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8937192CC61; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:14:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-35.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.35]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2A7360C9D; Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:14:42 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Manuel Lauss Cc: Manuel Lauss via Libc-help Subject: Re: How to set x86 ISA needed property? References: <87im7i4d08.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:14:40 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Manuel Lauss's message of "Wed, 27 Jan 2021 17:06:50 +0100") Message-ID: <8735ym4arz.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-help@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-help mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 16:14:48 -0000 * Manuel Lauss: > >> This is expected to happen only if you use something like >> -march=x86-64-v3 to build glibc, and only with recent toolchain >> version. I'm surprised you are hitting this with GCC 10, which does not >> implement -march=x86-64-v3. > > I'm surprised as well, though not all libs/executables have the property set, > most are missing it. Gentoo's patches to gcc don't add the property code > either, i'll check binutils next. It may be a binutils issue. It looks like it chooses x86-64-v3 as the minimal level that includes ABM (under a different name). That doesn't look correct. Please check if this is a Gentoo patch, or an upstream issue. Thanks, Florian -- Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill