This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: debug-early branch merged into mainline

On 06/06/2015 05:49 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Bootstrap fails on aarch64:

Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1objplus-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1obj-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/ira-costs.o differs
gcc/tree-sra.o differs
gcc/tree-parloops.o differs
gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.o differs
gcc/java/jcf-io.o differs
gcc/ipa-inline-analysis.o differs

The bootstrap comparison failure on ppc64le, aarch64, and possibly others is due to the order of some sections being in a different order with and without debugging.

Stage2 is being compiled with no debugging due to -gtoggle, and stage3 is being compiled with debugging.

For ira-costs.o on ppc64le we have:

-Disassembly of section .rodata._ZN10hash_tableI19cost_classes_hasher11xcallocatorE6expandEv.str1.8: +Disassembly of section .rodata._ZN10hash_tableI19cost_classes_hasher11xcallocatorE26find_empty_slot_for_expandEj.str1.8:


-Disassembly of section .rodata._ZN10hash_tableI19cost_classes_hasher11xcallocatorE26find_empty_slot_for_expandEj.str1.8: +Disassembly of section .rodata._ZN10hash_tableI19cost_classes_hasher11xcallocatorE6expandEv.str1.8:

There is no semantic difference between the objects, just the ordering.

I assume it's the same problem for the rest of the objects and architectures.

I will look into this, unless someone beats me to it, or has an idea right off the bat.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]