This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: m68k bootstrapping broken


Gunther Nikl <gni@gecko.de> writes:

> On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 03:37:35PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Gunther Nikl <gni@gecko.de> writes:
>> 
>> >   I just built a native compiler for m68k-amigaos with a cross-compiler
>> >   that had the updated patch applied. No objects in gcc/ except m68k.o
>> >   differed. Is that a good or bad sign?
>> 
>> Can you please find out where exactly they differ?
>
>   I thought that would be obvious: because of your patch (at least I think
>   so). I could build a version with the patch applied by an unpatched cross
>   compiler to compare the result with objects from the build with the patched
>   cross-compiler.

I thought you were talking about stage difference during bootstrap.  Is
m68k-amigaos self-hosting?

>   Note: the "differed" part in my original mail refered to a compare with an
>   unpatched native compiler built with an unpatched cross-compiler. Somehow
>   I expected other differences besides m68k.o because this patch is supposed
>   to fix bugs. But maybe for my target the bug wasn't triggered by the GCC
>   sources with the flags I used for compilation.

The only known miscompilation is in insn-recog.o, and only when building
with -O2 (which implies -funit-at-a-time).

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."


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