Hi,
Setting HOST_LIB_PATH_bfd/HOST_LIB_PATH_opcodes causes:
as: error while loading shared libraries:
/builddir/build/BUILD/binutils/./opcodes/.libs/libopcodes-2.23.51.0.2-0.1.fc17.so:
file too short
make[4]: *** [gold-threads.o] Error 2
when compiling gold using binutils linked with the same
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 8:31 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Setting HOST_LIB_PATH_bfd/HOST_LIB_PATH_opcodes causes:
as: error while loading shared libraries:
/builddir/build/BUILD/binutils/./opcodes/.libs/libopcodes-2.23.51.0.2-0.1.fc17.so:
file too short
make[4]: *** [gold
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 25 August 2012 11:58:08 H.J. Lu wrote:
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 8:31 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Setting HOST_LIB_PATH_bfd/HOST_LIB_PATH_opcodes causes:
as: error while loading shared
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
Il 25/08/2012 17:58, H.J. Lu ha scritto:
The change was introduced by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-03/msg01452.html
Paolo, do you remember the reason for this?
Actually, this patch came before bfd started using
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Janne Blomqvist
blomqvist.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
I've spent the last couple of days working on a stack backtrace
://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available on linux/release/2.23.51.0.2 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
09/10/2012
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Mohamed Abou Samra
my_abousa...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi All,
I'm trying to write a small program to check the decimal floating point gcc
extension but I encountered some problems
The program just converts a _Decimal64 number to double to print it and I
used
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Mohamed Abou Samra
my_abousa...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi All,
I'd like to know the performance differences between any gcc extension and
other external library I link it to my code as I linked Intel's DFP library
to my code and I used the gcc extension for the
. Source code.
The primary sites for the beta Linux binutils are:
1. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available on linux/release/2.23.51.0.3 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
09/18/2012
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Sure, I'll look into this problem today.
Thanks,
Dehao
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:25 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Hi Dehao, I suspect that your recent patch changing block handling has
broken bootstrap with
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
The GNU Compiler Collection version 4.7.2 has been released.
GCC 4.7.2 is the first bug-fix release containing important fixes
for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 4.7.1 with over 70 bugs
fixed since the previous
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Gregory Nietsky gregniet...@gmail.com wrote:
In using 4.7.2 and am working on extending our distro to have
x86/x86_64/x32/arm
Ive yanked the H.Lu patch to add --with-abi support from trunk and am
extending it to
have a default 32bit ABI we have nicknamed
are:
1. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available on linux/release/2.23.51.0.5 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
11/12/2012
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
Currently -fPIC -fPIE seems to be the same as -fPIE. Unfortunately,
-fPIE -fPIC also seems to be the same as -fPIE. It seems to me that,
as is usual with conflicting options, we should use the one that
appears last on
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:26 AM, Alexander Ivchenko aivch...@gmail.com wrote:
By default in Android we always compile with -fpic or -fPIC, even when
compiling executable. Because of that we have some test fails on
Android:
For example:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr47312.c
/* { dg-do run
Hi,
There is a bad memory access in LTO:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
Should we add an option to bootstrap GCC with asan?
--
H.J.
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Nov 17, 2012 9:37 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
There is a bad memory access in LTO:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
Should we add an option to bootstrap GCC with asan?
Sure
;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
11/26/2012
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 14 May 2012, H.J. Lu wrote:
As a minor nitpick, I have always used x32 with a lower case x. The
capital X32 looks odd to me.
I used X32
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Christophe Lyon
christophe.l...@linaro.org wrote:
On 11 December 2012 13:26, Tim Prince n...@aol.com wrote:
On 12/11/2012 5:14 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
On 11/12/12 09:56, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Richard Earnshaw
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Linux support for i386 has been removed. Should we do the same for GCC?
The oldest ix86 variant that'd be supported would be i486.
The benefit would be a few good cleanups:
* PROCESSOR_I386 / TARGET_386
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Leif Ekblad l...@rdos.net wrote:
I'm working on OS-adaptations for an OS that would use x86-64 applications
that are located above 4G, but not in the upper area. Binutils provide a
function to be able to set the start of text to above 4G, but there are
: by 10.49.12.210 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:31:59 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:31:59 -0800
Message-ID: came9rorcb+5zw17c_c2qhjbx_obhqdyhcj9q929nkndkpk_...@mail.gmail.com
Subject: PING [discuss] [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32
From: H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com
To: Michael Matz
/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
12/20/2012
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've bootstrappedtested the LRA branch on ia64 and posted the results
to gcc-testresults
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-12/msg01782.html).
Unfortunately there's nothing in the message that
for the beta Linux binutils are:
1. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available on linux/release/2.23.51.0.8 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
12/21/2012
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 7:00 PM, pps . mtlr...@hotmail.com wrote:
Question: How can I allocate random amount of stack space (using char
arrays or alloca, and then align pointer to that stack space and
reinterpret this chunk of memory as some structure that has some well
defined layout that
-2.23.51.0.9.tar.bz2. Source code.
The primary sites for the beta Linux binutils are:
1. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available on linux/release/2.23.51.0.9 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
On 02/01/2013 12:38 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Doing the extensions at caller side always is however IMO a preformance
bug in
GCC. We can definitly drop them at -Os, for non-PRS targets and for calls
within compilation unit
. Source code.
The primary sites for the beta Linux binutils are:
1. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available on linux/release/2.23.52.0.1 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
02/27/2013
available on linux/release/2.23.52.0.2 branch at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/binutils.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
04/26/2013
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Hendrik Greving
hendrik.greving.in...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
we need a (very) stable GCC version for our project. Is 4.8.1 a good
pick or is some of the 4.7.x versions better?
Regards,
Hendrik
I recommend GCC 4.7.x.
--
H.J.
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Dmitry Mikushin dmi...@kernelgen.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear all,
With gcc-4.7-20130629 and binutils-2.23.2 I'm getting
Error: no such instruction: `eovq -32(%rbp),%rdx'
There was no such issue with May' gcc snapshot and
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:i...@google.com]
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 6:26 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Help with using multilib for Cilk Library
On
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: H.J. Lu [mailto:hjl.to...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 6:56 PM
To: Iyer, Balaji V
Cc: Ian Lance Taylor; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Help with using multilib for Cilk
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Iyer, Balaji V balaji.v.i...@intel.com wrote:
Here is a patch:
1. Add target dependency on C++ for parallel build.
2. Remove hardcoded -O3 -fpic. libtool takes care of it.
3. Work around MAKEFLAGS for multilib build.
Hi H.J.,
Thank you! This patch
Hi,
Here is a patch to extend x86-64 psABI to support AVX-512:
http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/319433-015.pdf
--
H.J.
avx512.patch
Description: Binary data
Intel MPX:
http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/319433-015.pdf
introduces 4 bound registers, which will be used for parameter passing
in x86-64. Bound registers are cleared by branch instructions. Branch
instructions with BND prefix will keep bound register contents. This leads
to 2
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/23/2013 09:49 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
2. Extend the current 16-byte PLT entry:
ff 25 32 8b 21 00jmpq *name@GOTPCREL(%rip)
68 00 00 00 00 pushq $index
e9 00 00 00 00 jmpq
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to extend x86-64 psABI to support AVX-512:
Afaik avx 512 doubles the amount of xmm registers. Can we get them callee
saved please?
Make them callee
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is a patch to extend x86-64 psABI to support AVX
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/319433-015.pdf
introduces 4 bound registers, which will be used for parameter passing
in x86-64. Bound
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:53 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
http
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Peter Bergner berg...@vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 10:42 -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
Are there any other Linux targets with callee saved vector registers?
Yes, on POWER. From our ABI:
On processors with the VMX feature.
v0-v1 Volatile scratch
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 4:08 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com wrote:
2013/7/25 Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Roland McGrath rol...@hack.frob.com wrote:
Will an MPX-using binary require an MPX-supporting dynamic linker to run
correctly?
* An old
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Roland McGrath rol...@hack.frob.com wrote:
I've read through the MPX spec once, but most of it is still not very
clear to me. So please correct any misconceptions. (HJ, if you answer
any or all of these questions in your usual style with just, It's not a
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote:
* The foo@plt pseudo-symbols that e.g. objdump will display are based on
the BFD backend knowing the size of PLT entries. Arguably this ought
to look at sh_entsize of .plt instead of using baked-in knowledge, but
Here is the proposal to add Tag_GNU_X86_EXTERN_BRANCH and
NT_X86_FEATURE_PLT_BND. Any comments?
--
H.J.
---
Intel MPX:
http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/319433-015.pdf
introduces 4 bound registers, which will be used for parameter passing
in x86-64. Bound registers are cleared by
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com wrote:
On 08.08.13 at 02:33, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
We use the .gnu_attribute directive to record an object attribute:
enum
{
Tag_GNU_X86_EXTERN_BRANCH = 4,
};
for the types of external branch instructions
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com wrote:
On 08.08.13 at 18:01, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com wrote:
On 08.08.13 at 02:33, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
We use the .gnu_attribute directive
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:49:06PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
There are 2 psABI considerations:
1. Should PLT entries in all binaries, with and without MPX, be changed
to 32-byte or just the necessary ones?
Ugh, please
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
function_value_regno_p hook implementation for i386 target
(ix86_function_value_regno_p) always returns false for DX register.
But DX register is used to return 128 bit values an AX:DX. Is it
intentional or a
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com wrote:
2013/8/29 H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Ilya Enkovich enkovich@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
function_value_regno_p hook implementation for i386 target
(ix86_function_value_regno_p
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 02:38:01PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
.. looks like this is target/58269, which therefore affects
x86_64-linux too.
Now this reproduces to me, too. apppy_args expansion is trying to
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Hendrik Greving
hendrik.greving.in...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have a GCC regression test failing for our backend for -O3. I am
posting its code below. This might be more of a C-standard question,
but is the optimization case guaranteed not to fail from a C
Hi,
www.x86-64.org was down for several months and it is up
now, but not in its full capacity. I created a x86-64 psABI
group:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/x86-64-abi
so that there is a mailing list we can discuss x86-64 psABI
related issues.
Thanks.
--
H.J.
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
11/08/2013
I renamed the release tag to hjl/linux/release/2.24.51.0.1
H.J.
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:25 AM, H.J. Lu hongjiu...@intel.com wrote:
It is also available as linux/release/2.24.51.0.1 tag at
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=summary
H.J.
---
This is the beta release
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Hendrik Greving
hendrik.greving.in...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, thanks, that explains it... Apparently x86 splits the vector movs
into 2 in
ix86_expand_vector_move_misalign-ix86_avx256_split_vector_move_misalign.
But I wanted to mention that e.g. icc, despite also
Hi,
float.h has
/* Addition rounds to 0: zero, 1: nearest, 2: +inf, 3: -inf, -1: unknown. */
/* ??? This is supposed to change with calls to fesetround in fenv.h. */
#undef FLT_ROUNDS
#define FLT_ROUNDS 1
Clang introduces __builtin_flt_rounds and
#define FLT_ROUNDS (__builtin_flt_rounds())
Hi,
This binutils adds R_X86_64_PC32_BND and R_X86_64_PLT32_BND as specified
in
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/x86-64-abi/Cmukf_krWl4
These 2 relocations only appear in relocatable files. They have no
impact on glibc nor gcc. I am checking it into master and 2.24 branch.
Here is a proposal to use 32-byte PLT to preserve bound registers.
Any comments?
BTW, we are working on another proposal to use a second PLT
section with 8 byte or 16 byte memory overhead, instead of
24 byte overhead.
--
H.J.
---
Intel MPX:
There is a typo in pushq offset computation. It should be
pushq_offset += ((unsigned char *) pushq_offset)[-6] == 0xf2 ? 1 : 0
instead of
pushq_offset += ((unsigned char *) pushq_offset)[6] == 0xf2 ? 1 : 0
H.J.
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:03 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Here
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Steve Ellcey sell...@mips.com wrote:
I am building a cross GCC (targeting MIPS) on an x86-64 Linux system but I
want to build the compiler as a 32 bit executable. I thought the right way
to do this was to do:
export CFLAGS='-O2 -g -m32'
export CXXFLAGS-'-O2
Hi,
This is a proposal to update x86-64 PLT for MPX.We don't
need to change GCC nor glibc to support it. The binutils change
is implemented on hjl/mpx/pltext8 branch. GDB works except
there are no synthetic symbols for the .plt section. Prelink change
is very small.
Any comments?
Thanks.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:25 AM, Richard Biener
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Konstantin Vladimirov
konstantin.vladimi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
nothing changes if everything is unsigned and we are guaranteed to not
raise UB on overflow:
unsigned
Hi,
I have been seeing 3 libstdc++ tests:
FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc+
+.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc++_multiple_inclusion.cc (test for
excess errors)
FAIL: 30_threads/async/async.cc execution test
fail/pass at random on a fast machine. Is this
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 05:43:12PM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 12/07/2013 04:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
I have been seeing 3 libstdc++ tests:
FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++200x/stdc+
+.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 9:26 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Jakub Jelinek ja...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 05:43:12PM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 12/07/2013 04:48 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
I have been seeing 3 libstdc++ tests:
FAIL: 17_intro
Hi,
There are git tags for GCC 4.8.0 and 4.8.1. But git tag
for GCC 4.8.2 is missing.
--
H.J.
are:
1. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/
It is also available as hjl/linux/release/2.24.51.0.2 tag at
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
12/13/2013
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 2:12 AM, Richard Sandiford
rdsandif...@googlemail.com wrote:
Tejas Belagod tbela...@arm.com writes:
When I relaxed CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS to undefined for AArch64,
gcc.c-torture/execute/copysign1.c generates incorrect code because LRA cannot
seem to handle subregs
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Denis K deniskravt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've been trying to compile gcc 4.5.4 from the sources using
--with-fpmath=387 but I'm getting this error: Invalid
--with-fpmath=387. I looked in the configs and found that it doesn't
support this option:
case
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Denis K deniskravt...@gmail.com wrote:
My settings were taken from the comment here:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9450394/how-to-install-gcc-from-scratch-with-gmp-mpfr-mpc-elf-without-shared-librari
--disable-shared
--disable-bootstrap
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Cary Coutant ccout...@google.com wrote:
I see no reason why -static -pie should not work. -static does
*not* specify the type of output directly. -static chooses input
objects. -pie affects output. The two options are logically
orthogonal. You ought to
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
When there is -static, -dynamic-linker won't passed to ld. -static,
-shared, -pie should be mutually exclusive for GCC driver.
A static PIE shouldn't specify an interpreter
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
When there is -static, -dynamic-linker won't passed
Hi,
Here is the proposal to update x86-64 PLT for MPX. The linker change
is implemented on hjl/mpx/pltext8 branch. Any comments/feedbacks?
Thanks.
--
H.J.
---
Intel MPX:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/file/319433-017pdf
introduces 4 bound registers, which will be used for parameter
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Steve Ellcey sell...@mips.com wrote:
Richard,
While experimenting with a local GCC change I added two new Masks to
mips.opt and ran into a build failure about too many masks:
./options.h:4172:2: error: #error too many target masks
It looks like we already
tag at
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=summary
Thanks.
H.J. Lu
hjl.to...@gmail.com
01/27/2014
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:42 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:11 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is the proposal to update x86-64 PLT for MPX. The linker change
is implemented on hjl/mpx/pltext8 branch. Any comments/feedbacks?
Thanks
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:50 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:42 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 8:11 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Here is the proposal to update x86-64 PLT for MPX. The linker change
is implemented
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
Since we are nearing release, I thought I'd mention I see:
../../gcc/gcc/doc/invoke.texi:1114: warning: node next `Overall Options' in
menu `C Dialect Options' and in sectioning `Invoking G++' differ
There is a discrepancy when passing empty struct in C++ on x86-64
between GCC and Clang:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/x86-64-abi/EZzVyvSxUx4
An empty struct of size 1 byte is classified as NO_CLASS.
GCC uses an eight byte slot to pass it on stack and returns it in
EAX while Clang just
Register Usage table in x86-64 psABI has
%rbx callee-saved register; optionally used as base pointer
However, everywhere it uses %r15 to store the GOT address,
including PLT for large model.
It is a typo to mark RBX as GOT base register in Register Usage table.
GCC large model Linux
x86-64 psABI has
name@GOT: specifies the offset to the GOT entry for the symbol name
from the base of the GOT.
name@GOTPLT: specifies the offset to the GOT entry for the symbol name
from the base of the GOT, implying that there is a corresponding PLT entry.
But GCC never generates name@GOTPLT
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
x86-64 psABI has
name@GOT: specifies the offset to the GOT entry for the symbol name
from the base of the GOT.
name@GOTPLT: specifies the offset to the GOT entry for the symbol name
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:14 AM, Kirill Yukhin kirill.yuk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Support of OpenMP 4.0 offloading to future Xeon Phi was fully checked in to
main
trunk.
Thanks everybody who helped w/ development and review.
I noticed many libgomp test failures:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:03 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
x86-64 psABI has
name@GOT: specifies the offset to the GOT entry for the symbol name
from the base of the GOT
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 Nov 09:17, H.J. Lu wrote:
I noticed many libgomp test failures:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2014-11/msg00309.html
Have you seen them?
Hi H.J.,
I do not see these regressions on i686-linux and x86_64
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 Nov 10:48, H.J. Lu wrote:
/usr/local/bin/ld: /tmp/ccA8cExp.o: plugin needed to handle lto object^M
Looks like we should set flag_fat_lto_objects while compilation with
offloading.
I'll investigate this issue
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 Nov 10:48, H.J. Lu wrote:
/usr/local/bin/ld: /tmp/ccA8cExp.o: plugin needed to handle lto object^M
Looks like we should set flag_fat_lto_objects while compilation with
offloading.
I'll investigate this issue
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Ilya Verbin iver...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 Nov 2014, at 23:11, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
Section Headers:
[Nr] Name TypeAddress OffSize
ES Flg Lk Inf Al
[ 0] NULL
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 5:08 PM, David Edelsohn edels...@gnu.org wrote:
I am pleased to announce that the GCC Steering Committee has
appointed Maxim Kuvyrkov as reviewer for the Android sub-port.
Please join me in congratulating Maxim on his new role.
Maxim, please update your
Hi,
Git tags are missing for GCC 4.9.1, 4.9.2, 4.8.3 and 4.7.4.
--
H.J.
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 6:14 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
Linker does:
... code that looks like it might create just one GOT slot ...
So if a symbol is accessed by both @GOT and @PLTOFF, its
needs_plt will be true and its got.plt entry
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
It has nothing to do with large model.
Yes, I didn't say so. I've used it only to force GCC to emit @GOT relocs
(otherwise it would have used @GOTPCREL) to disprove your claim.
Well
Hi,
Currently x86-64 linker generate binaries with branch overflow for
large text section size:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17592
It happens to small, medium and large models. I will update linker
to check for branch overflow. In the meantime, Michael suggested
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 6:14 AM, Michael Matz m...@suse.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
Linker does:
... code that looks like it might create just one GOT slot ...
So if a symbol is accessed by both @GOT and @PLTOFF, its
needs_plt will be true and its got.plt entry
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 8:38 AM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
One way to optimize it is to make PLT entry to use the normal GOT
slot:
jmp *name@GOTPCREL(%rip)
8 byte nop
where name@GOTPCREL points to the normal GOT slot
updated by R_X86_64_GLOB_DAT relocation at run-time.
Should I
1 - 100 of 7743 matches
Mail list logo
