https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107848
--- Comment #2 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
This is likely due to the fact they added new BPF relocations:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D102712
Or course not bothering telling us.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107438
Bug ID: 107438
Summary: bpf:
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107181
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106733
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106733
--- Comment #2 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
Urgh I obviously meant bpf-unknown-none.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106733
Bug ID: 106733
Summary: bpf: facilitate constant propagation of function
addresses
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537
--- Comment #2 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > This option is used in the kernel source tree for some BPF programs.
>
> Why not fix the sources? Seems not hard to add a cast or two.
That's what I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537
Bug ID: 106537
Summary: GCC doesn't support
-W[no-]compare-distinct-pointer-types
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #9 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
So I got feedback from the clang/llvm folks on this.
As you can see in [1] they asked the WG14 reflectors about the footnote 135 in
the C18 spec and their conclusion is that there is no normative
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106515
--- Comment #3 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
This is due to having not so good regular expressions in the test btf-int-1.c
and to a slightly different way than the powerpc backend has to comment lines
in assembly.
Working on a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106515
--- Comment #2 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
Don't bother I just reproduced the issue in powerpc64le-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106515
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106270
--- Comment #3 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
Wilco: The assessment in comment 1 was extracted from an internal discussion on
an issue that is still under investigation. We are certainly hitting a
cant-reach-the-linker-generated-veneer problem, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #8 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
After a little discussion in IRC I filed this LLVM bug:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/56468
Regarding the ICE described by Ulrich, I cannot reproduce it using:
bpf-unknown-none-gcc (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
--- Comment #7 from Jose E. Marchesi ---
If, as a workaround, I try to use a `section' attribute, like in:
__attribute__((section(".rodata"))) volatile const int lala = 0;
I don't get an ICE, but a section with write permissions:
.section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25521
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Jose E. Marchesi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jose.marchesi at oracle dot com
---
17 matches
Mail list logo
