This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: bootstrap regression on sparc

From: Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com>
To: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>
Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "amodra at gmail dot com" <amodra at gmail dot com>, "ebotcazou at adacore dot com" <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 08:34:29 -0600
Subject: Re: bootstrap regression on sparc
References: <20111111.204123.1395614998044500021.davem@davemloft.net> <20111111.235302.903136402823084120.davem@davemloft.net>

On 11/11/2011 10:53 PM, David Miller wrote:

From: David Miller<davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:41:23 -0500 (EST)
I haven't looked more deeply at it, but the first recent suspicious change
are the basic block handling changes Alan made two days ago:
2011-11-09 Alan Modra<amodra@gmail.com>

* function.c (bb_active_p): Delete.
...

I've verified that the bootstrap succeeds with this change reverted.

FWIW somewhere in the past few days, a few of the CPU
architectures that support RTEMS have broken.  Yesterday's
update did not build for sparc, i386, m68k, mips, sparc64,

That is in addition to existing regressions from 4.6
on avr, bfin, lm32, and powerpc.

Only arm, h8300, m32c (which now ICEs build rtems),
m32r, and sh build gcc and RTEMS at this point.

From my perspective, the head doesn't look so good. :(

--joel

Follow-Ups:
- Re: bootstrap regression on sparc
  - From: David Miller

References:
- bootstrap regression on sparc
  - From: David Miller
- Re: bootstrap regression on sparc
  - From: David Miller

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