[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Brett Neumeier from comment #9) > Confirmed, the issue does not occur with 2.33.1. Thank you for your > attention and help! Please CC me on the binutils bug (just so I can keep track of it).
[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 Brett Neumeier changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID CC||bneumeier at gmail dot com Status|WAITING |RESOLVED --- Comment #9 from Brett Neumeier --- Confirmed, the issue does not occur with 2.33.1. Thank you for your attention and help!
[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 --- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski --- Note I think it is related to the fixes that was done for https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2 which was fixed in 2.34.
[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Brett Neumeier from comment #6) > I can try again with 2.33.1 and see if I get different results, if that > would help? If it works with 2.33.1, can you report this directly to binutils: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla ? Since this is a bug in binutils as far as I can tell.
[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 --- Comment #6 from Brett Neumeier --- The host binutils (used to compile the cross-toolchain): $ as --version GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.34.0.20200507 Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or later. This program has absolutely no warranty. This assembler was configured for a target of `x86_64-pc-linux-gnu'. The cross-binutils is: $ ./aarch64-cbl-linux-gnu-as --version GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.34.0.20200517 Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or later. This program has absolutely no warranty. This assembler was configured for a target of `aarch64-cbl-linux-gnu'. So, pretty much the same, the cross-toolchain has more updates from the binutils 2.34 branch. I can try again with 2.33.1 and see if I get different results, if that would help?
[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski --- The assembler code works for me with binutils 2.33.1. So again which version of binutils are you using for the cross compiler?
[Bug middle-end/95318] gcc 10.1 on x86_64 fails to build aarch64 cross-compiler when using default optimization settings
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95318 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Component|bootstrap |middle-end Last reconfirmed||2020-05-25 Ever confirmed|0 |1 Keywords||assemble-failure, build --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- What binutils version you are using? orr x4, x4, x7 .LVL33: .loc 1 170 12 view .LVU92 .LBE26: .LBE25: .LBE24: .loc 1 263 7 is_stmt 1 view .LVU93 .p2align 3,,7 .L36: .loc 1 281 4 view .LVU94 .loc 1 282 35 is_stmt 0 view .LVU95 and w6, w5, 112 This seems like a bug in binutils to me. The only difference between with/without -fno-align-loops is the line marked with .
