[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Bug target/41684] [4.4/4.5 regression] binutils testsuite failures when built with 4.4/4.5




------- Comment #13 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-10-27 14:58 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
> when binutils 2.20 branch is built with gcc-4.4 branch or trunk, I see the
> following test failures in the ld testsuite. Checked with gcc-4.4 from
> debian/testing, debian/unstable and ubuntu/karmic, and gcc-snapshot (4.5
> 20091010) from debian/unstable.
> 
> Running
> /home/doko/tmp/binutils-2.19.91.20091006/ld/testsuite/ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp ...
> FAIL: visibility (hidden_normal) (non PIC)
> FAIL: visibility (hidden_normal) (non PIC, load offset)
> FAIL: visibility (normal) (non PIC)
> FAIL: visibility (normal) (non PIC, load offset)
> Running
> /home/doko/tmp/binutils-2.19.91.20091006/ld/testsuite/ld-shared/shared.exp ...
> FAIL: shared (non PIC)
> FAIL: shared (non PIC, load offset)
> FAIL: shared (PIC main, non PIC so)

 When generating code that is not position independent, the compiler is
entitled to enable optimizations that don't retain the property of symbol
pre-emption that is possible with shared libraries and position independent
code. Section anchors is one optimization that doesn't retain symbol
pre-emptibility in shared libraries and hence is disabled when generating PIC
code. All these failures are because the tests are trying to create non-PIC
.so's with section anchors turned on.

The tests need to be fixed with respect to section anchors by building them
with -fno-section-anchors for the arm-linux-gnueabi port.


The Objective C testsuite failures should be fixed by disabling section anchors
in the objective C and C++ frontend and not by disabling this in the backend. 

Look at the mail thread here for reference. 

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-08/msg02194.html

However that is a subject of a separate bug report, though these failures might
be related to PR41617. Hence this is an INVALID bug as far as GCC is concerned
and hence marking it so.

cheers
Ramana




-- 

ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41684

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


Reply to: