https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #23 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #22)
> I think we can close this as fixed.
Yes, I can confirm libraw now builds fine. Full build log available at [1].
Adrian
> [1]
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #21 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Sat Oct 3 15:20:58 2015
New Revision: 228449
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228449=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2015-09-29 Kaz Kojima
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #19 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #18)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #16)
> > Regardless of those, Kaz, can you please commit attachment 36397 [details]?
> > Then I can handle the other cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #20 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #19)
I have no objection. I thought that the fix for PR67723 on trunk is first,
though either way will be fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #17 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Author: kkojima
Date: Tue Sep 29 05:36:01 2015
New Revision: 228228
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=228228=gcc=rev
Log:
PR target/67716
* [SH] Implement targetm.override_options_after_change hook
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #18 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #16)
> Regardless of those, Kaz, can you please commit attachment 36397 [details]?
> Then I can handle the other cases on top of that.
Done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #16 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #15)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #14)
> > Yes, there are issues. I've created PR 67723.
>
> Ah, you are right. I forgot -m optimization options at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo ---
Created attachment 36394
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36394=edit
preprocessed C++ source for dcraw_common.cpp
The code in attachment 36389 doesn't compile with the trunk compiler because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo ---
On sh-elf/newlib there are no threads, so -fopenmp doesn't work. I can't
reproduce it Without -fopenmp.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #11 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 36397
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36397=edit
patch for targetm.override_options_after_change
Could you try this patch?
What is going on:
1. align_jumps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #12 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #11)
> Created attachment 36397 [details]
> patch for targetm.override_options_after_change
>
> Could you try this patch?
>
> What is going on:
>
> 1. align_jumps
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #9 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
Created attachment 36395
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36395=edit
reduced test case
This one fails with the same asm error with my sh-elf c++ for -g -O1.
It looks that
#pragma GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #13 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #12)
> Maybe we should move some
> more of the sh_option_override things sh_override_options_after_change? I
> don't know ...
I thought the same thing too. From the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #15 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #14)
> Yes, there are issues. I've created PR 67723.
Ah, you are right. I forgot -m optimization options at all.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #13)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #12)
> > Maybe we should move some
> > more of the sh_option_override things sh_override_options_after_change? I
> > don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Attachment 36390 is not assembled, of course. But the actual assembler output
from gcc :).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #3 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 36388
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36388=edit
Compressed C++ source for dcraw_common.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #4 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 36389
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36389=edit
Compressed, preprocessed C++ source for dcraw_common.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #5 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 36390
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36390=edit
Compressed, assembled C++ source for dcraw_common.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #2 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #1)
> Could you send .i and .s files with adding -save-temps to the problematic
> compilation as usual? The build directory is useful only for the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67716
--- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #0)
> I have taken the build directory as is and created a compressed tar ball
> from it which can be downloaded here:
Could you send .i and .s files
23 matches
Mail list logo
