[PATCH] Improve jump threading dump output.

[Jeff Law]

On 10/4/2021 6:05 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 8:26 PM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So I'm really wondering if these were caused by that patch you'd sent me
>> privately for the visium issue.  Right now we're regressing in a few
>> places, but it's not bad.
>>
>> visium & bfin are the only embedded targets failing.
>>
>> visium fails:
>> Tests that now fail, but worked before (9 tests):
>>
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/960218-1.c   -Os  (test for excess errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/961125-1.c   -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
>> -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions  (test for
>> excess errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/961125-1.c   -O3 -g  (test for excess
>> errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pending-4.c   -O1  (test for excess
>> errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c   -O2  (test for excess errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c   -O2 -flto
>> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none  (test for excess errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c   -O2 -flto
>> -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects  (test for excess errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr58209.c   -O3 -g  (test for excess
>> errors)
>> visium-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68911.c   -O1  (test for excess errors)
>>
>> We've already discussed 960218-1 a bit.  I wouldn't be surprised if
>> they're all the same problem in the end.  These started with:
> Is this still an issue?  I'm having some trouble reproducing it.
>
> I tried building a combined tree with adapted instructions from here
> (dunno if they still apply):
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Building_Cross_Toolchains_with_gcc
>
> Building visium-sim fails with:
>
>      BFD does not support target visium-sim-none.
>
> Building visium-elf or even bfin-elf has libctf compile errors.
>
> Instead, I tried just building cc1 for both visium and bfin but I
> don't get any *compilation* errors from the above tests.  I'm assuming
> compilation errors since they say "test for excess errors".  Are they
> compilation errors?
>
> If this is still an issue, is there an easy way to reproduce?
For the visium stuff, look for a call to abort () in the resulting 
assembly code of 960218-1.  Due to the newlib/libgloss bug on the visum 
port, any call to abort () results in a link error which triggers the 
excess errors failure.

Jeff