It's fixed by this commit:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=d40b3c1e439db05c835b6bd4fd5bba58fda71dd6
juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
From: Edwin Lu
Date: 2024-01-17 09:45
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches
CC: Patrick O'Neill
Subject: Re: [Committed V2] RISC-V: Fix regression (GCC-14
:45 AM
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai; gcc-patches
Cc: Patrick O'Neill
Subject: Re: [Committed V2] RISC-V: Fix regression (GCC-14 compare with
GCC-13.2) of SHA256 from coremark-pro
On 1/16/2024 5:41 PM, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Are you saying using glibc lib ? I do the testing with newlib,
On 1/16/2024 5:41 PM, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
Are you saying using glibc lib ? I do the testing with newlib, I didn't
anything wrong.
Yes, I'm seeing the problem using glibc. Looking at our postcommit ci
reports, it appears to only affect linux rv32gcv.
It seems that this patch triggers
Date: 2024-01-17 09:37
To: Juzhe-Zhong; gcc-patches
CC: Patrick O'Neill
Subject: Re: [Committed V2] RISC-V: Fix regression (GCC-14 compare with
GCC-13.2) of SHA256 from coremark-pro
Hi Juzhe,
I'm seeing that this patch introduces failures with rv32gcv-ilp32d as
seen here https://github.com/ewlu
Hi Juzhe,
I'm seeing that this patch introduces failures with rv32gcv-ilp32d as
seen here https://github.com/ewlu/gcc-precommit-ci/issues/1194. Digging
a little deeper, it appears that there's an illegal instruction in a
shared library which (at least for FAIL:
