From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wfout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wfout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.148]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E91E63986431 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 01:02:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org E91E63986431 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sociotechnical.xyz Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sociotechnical.xyz ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org E91E63986431 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=64.147.123.148 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1717462982; cv=none; b=GlU2fdLZ0laY9RFPlpu2s+ZdFvZxqKjHwWm8RNZa61SrluozuKYumevJXXS9VSSTNwtvvYf7ARPnGKJDdm3ed+V5VmVLzrFCU/RRDj78qf9stQlWuZjTqHEMa4DaY3i65QDz/zJsmGVd4m4/3PXW0QDicbysprWlUHqBWXbG7Jw= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1717462982; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Rjd7jgT75gipmJlxri2UolNUiHGIaTRUgOZP5dUpjbI=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:MIME-Version:Message-Id:Date:From: To:Subject; b=fmqQSvf3DFY07Lgu5/zT2aJcwcBq6RJU6GocvMJx0JsCF3cxwT3aUjoRFK5lKXcGmwvLSsHeBW9fsRZrGiEf4f5faJtFJIKhuKLrCZMKZjQrLfwnlqnLHEZXfLDW7aunxQBTvaRaDqAVoZz+vN0lUNratwTiB9dgm5Z+xMxczYE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C0E51C00182; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:02:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap44 ([10.202.2.94]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 03 Jun 2024 21:02:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sociotechnical.xyz; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1717462976; x=1717549376; bh=yBLGaVvFv4aWBCu0D2BL5FD2pqAOfUoKbDhfvJJ29Xk=; b= Pqbuevo/F3wQ9Rt/FOxWKJk1GLojovtTKZYdF8DAb3t1bzuzbaWMR+bXeDzeoBs7 /Xex1PVl8S6FwDWU0X9o7Hh9y+hia+uLMolUxdTbTQXc2IuK7OGVSNMMn7XhEeUx RKWiTLFFCdtMRqHOTwrd9tzWUCQWaQ4lXFPqsYEI2iN8RHiYCOUM6WQ0bsvjNZd2 lgob0v6CdVwDJfVDoAqsmeVgVZLZG14hEzE/lfTi8zaQ38gH440zQPxYXxhhe/x5 IYA1DHYa5nsNeNnT8mm8zBWJ0YsE3pzaFBJ8n34KVJ/83XBTUqbfNAZZ7yWnbkgK 5CGqR6Q2IYvw5UBk1Dhp4w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1717462976; x=1717549376; bh=yBLGaVvFv4aWBCu0D2BL5FD2pqAO fUoKbDhfvJJ29Xk=; b=qh6rUvXqyZ49kx/aQeY/TE0oUJH0Js1Fh7pP0QVvSsNg gj1OLUU/iwP/yI8xEXmSCLcyEelei919dpZrU4DdVKmrDL3nN7P9HoB4mcnz/YJa kPAIVGmWUoVWvjF91viNN1FGAUG3aQfFWNCE/+jXc3cH60fU/sRUuuC1bIKKlCmG YVF3KA15eYObVpfchw74OWHh8Yv6kLQyEziBVv4TbSZPpLqCFh6Xls2MOAGVvfUq MtGYZVAJwv7AQswEFOB0deo0jtRpTVbTO1+vaYrEU7vjFGs4FbE+6BaIuroRfBJ8 pkM9avNWsUALNk3PUz4t1QNhjNSlXBAOE1NUIDkE+w== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrvdelfedggeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne gfrhhlucfvnfffucdlfeehmdenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertder redtnecuhfhrohhmpedfrfhivghtrhhoucfoohhnthgvihhrohdfuceophhivghtrhhose hsohgtihhothgvtghhnhhitggrlhdrgiihiieqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdeghfef udejtdeghfehvdeuiedviefghfejhffhjeevueefhfevteeiieduteeinecuvehluhhsth gvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphhivghtrhhosehsohgt ihhothgvtghhnhhitggrlhdrgiihii X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i7f494689:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 965CA36A0075; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:02:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-491-g033e30d24-fm-20240520.001-g033e30d2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <2fa559aa-9ba7-4935-acac-3db616d60308@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 21:02:36 -0400 From: "Pietro Monteiro" To: "Joel Sherrill" , Newlib Subject: Re: gcc 14+ and m68k build failure Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_INFOUSMEBIZ,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Sun, Jun 2, 2024, at 8:58 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Hi > > GCC 14+ fail to build a few newlib targets. I am looking into m68k-rtems > (m68k-elf) first. If there is a common thread, it appears to be related to > targets which do not have long double in all multilibs. The same thing is happening on SH for the m4-single-only multilib. > First, how do you see more than "CC..file.c"? Add `V=1' to you make invocation. > The error for m68k starts with this: > > ake[3]: Entering directory > '/home/joel/test-gcc/b-m68k-rtems6-gcc/m68k-rtems6/newlib' > CC libm/complex/libm_a-ccoshl.o > ../../../gcc/newlib/libm/complex/ccoshl.c: In function 'ccoshl': > ../../../gcc/newlib/libm/complex/ccoshl.c:43:13: error: implicit > declaration of function 'coshl'; did you mean 'coshf'? > [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > 43 | w = coshl(x) * cosl(y) + (sinhl(x) * sinl(y)) * I; > | ^~~~~ > | coshf > ../../../gcc/newlib/libm/complex/ccoshl.c:43:24: error: implicit > declaration of function 'cosl'; did you mean 'cosf'? > [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > 43 | w = coshl(x) * cosl(y) + (sinhl(x) * sinl(y)) * I; > > > I suspect that since only one multilib for m68k has multilib and that is > picked at compile time, the multilib here isn't enabling the prototypes for > long double. That idea seems right but the code doesn't seem to always > follow up to avoid trying to compile files like the above which assume long > double. I think I understand what's going on. `_LDBL_EQ_DBL' is not being defined for that multilib. So, functions like `coshl' aren't compiled (see newlib/libm/common/coshl.c), but the complex versions of the functions don't have the `#ifdef _LDBL_EQ_DBL' guard around them (see: newlib/libm/complex/ccoshl.c). And GCC 14 changed the lack of a function declaration from a warning into an error. > Ideas appreciated. I'll try to post a patch adding the ifdefs to add long double complex functions. > --joel pietro