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: libstdc++, -m64 and can't find atom for N_GSYM stabs

    I just reran "make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_board "unix{-m64}"'" in the
darwin_objdir/powerpc-apple-darwin8/libstdc++-v3 directory after applying the
following patch to suppress the "can't find atom for N_GSYM stabs" ld64 linker warnings...

--- gcc-4.2-20060825/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/   2006-08-26 11:22:52.000000000 -0400
+++ gcc-4.2-20060825/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/lib/prune.exp       2006-08-26 11:23:39.000000000 -0400
@@ -29,5 +29,7 @@
     regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n\]*: Additional NOP may be necessary to workaround Itanium processor A/B step errata" $text "" text
     regsub -all "(^|\n)\[^\n*\]*: Assembler messages:\[^\n\]*" $text "" text
+    regsub -all "(^|\n)can't find atom for N_GSYM stabs \[^\n\]* in \[^\n\]*" $text "" text
     return $text

Once the noise from those linker warnings is removed from the libstdc++-v3 testsuite
results at -m64 on Darwin PPC, we find that the failures drop from 54 to just 6. So
we actually only have four additional libstdc++-v3 testsuite failures at -m64
compared to -m32. These are...

FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/cons/char/ execution test
FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/cons/wchar_t/ execution test
FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/insert/char/ execution test
FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/insert/wchar_t/ execution test

which certainly would appear as if they are all related bugs. Can you try
the above check on x86_64 and see how many regressions you have when the
linker warnings suppressed?
ps Do you want to create a PR for these failures at -m64 or should I?

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