Re: debug-early branch merged into mainline

[Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>]

On 06/07/2015 02:33 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On June 7, 2015 6:00:05 PM GMT+02:00, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 06/07/2015 11:25 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > > On June 7, 2015 5:03:30 PM GMT+02:00, Aldy Hernandez
> > <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > 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.
> > >
> > > Check whether the symbol table walkers are walking hash tables.  I
> > assume the above are emitted via the symbol removal handling for debug
> > stuff?
> >
> > Ughh, indeed.  These sections are being outputted from
> > output_object_blocks which traverses a hash table:
> >
> > void
> > output_object_blocks (void)
> > {
> >   object_block_htab->traverse<void *, output_object_block_htab> (NULL);
> > }
> >
> > Perhaps we should sort them by some deterministic field and then call
> > output_object_block() on each member of the resulting list?
>
> Yes, that would be the usual fix. Maybe sth has an UID already, is the 'object' a decl by chance?

The attached patch fixes the bootstrap failure on ppc64le, and 
theoretically the aarch64 problem as well, but I haven't checked.

Tested on ppc64le linux by bootstrapping, and regtesting C/C++ against 
pre debug-early merge sources.  Also tested by a full bootstrap and 
regtest on x86-64 Linux.

OK for mainline?

Aldy

Attachment: curr
Description: Text document