Bug#750996: eglibc FTBFS on Alpha: malloc/malloc.os build failure and testsuite failures.
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:08:24PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 09:45:30PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 21:25 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:10:00PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 18:02 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > > > systemtap-sdt-dev was supposed to be something transparent for the
> > > > > glibc, but in practice it causes build failure on at least on alpha (see
> > > > > above). Looking at the BTS, I see it also causes problems with GCC, so I
> > > > > am a bit concerned on other side effects we might haven't seen yet.
> > > >
> > > > Both issues were GCC bugs now fixed on mainline. See
> > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/PR61231 and http://gcc.gnu.org/PR61336.
> > > > The first one was not really related to sys/sdt.h at all. The second was
> > > > indeed a bug in GCC on alpha triggered by the usage of the "i"
> > > > constrained in the sys/sdt.h asm, now fixed.
> > >
> > > I doesn't seems to be the case. PR61336 is about the sys/sdt.h code
> > > triggering an ICE, and it has indeed been fixed. That said it now emits
> > > an error instead of an ICE, so sys/sdt.h is still not usable on alpha,
> > > as the last comment says:
> > >
> > > | Richard Henderson 2014-06-02 16:47:20 UTC
> > > | The ICE has been resolved.
> > > |
> > > | Note that the asm in question comes from system tap, which has not been
> > > | ported to alpha. So you're probably better off disabling that in your
> > > | (e)glibc build too.
> >
> > I asked Richard and he said that mainline GCC now allows the "i"
> > constraint with a symbol, with an asm. So it shouldn't produce an error.
> > What error are you seeing?
> >
> > stap might not know how to interpret such SDT ELF notes. Since systemtap
> > is not known to work on alpha (I don't know for other SDT consumers like
> > gdb and perf). But that would be independent of building with sys/sdt.h.
> > So unless I misunderstood him things should compile fine, even if you
> > decided to keep sys/sdt.h enabled for the glibc build on alpha.
> >
> > Of course, if none of the SDT consumers are known to work on alpha then
> > having them might just be a noop and it should also be fine to disable
> > them on that platform if you wish. But I don't think that is necessary.
>
> I don't have access to an alpha machine. Michael, could you please
> confirm that the patch from PR61336 does remove the ICE, but in addition
> allow the file to be compiled?
OK, will do. Might be a couple of days before I have the answer.
Cheers
Michael.
Reply to: