From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Romain Naour Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 19:17:21 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/gcc: fix gcc 8.4, 9.4 and 10.2 for sparcv8 (ss10) In-Reply-To: <20210121220032.460d1d9b@windsurf.home> References: <20210120230234.2086807-1-romain.naour@gmail.com> <20210121220032.460d1d9b@windsurf.home> Message-ID: <11ccc993-44c3-e822-70d8-0b7ad9d70775@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Waldemar, All, Le 21/01/2021 ? 22:00, Thomas Petazzoni a ?crit?: > Hello, > > In the title: gcc 9.3 and not gcc 9.4. > > On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:02:34 +0100 > Romain Naour wrote: > >> As reported on IRC by sephthir, the defconfig qemu_sparc_ss10_defconfig >> doesn't work as expected. Instead it produce illegal instruction >> messages. >> >> gcc 8.3, 9.2 are the latest working gcc version. >> git bisect between gcc 8.4 and 8.4 allowed to identify > > between gcc 8.3 and 8.4 > >> the commit that introcuce the regression. >> >> Reverting this patch allowed to produce a working rootfs. >> >> Fixes: >> https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/jobs/786589934 >> >> Signed-off-by: Romain Naour >> --- >> ...get-92095-internal-error-with-O1-mcp.patch | 325 ++++++++++++++++++ >> ...get-92095-internal-error-with-O1-mcp.patch | 322 +++++++++++++++++ >> ...get-92095-internal-error-with-O1-mcp.patch | 325 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 972 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/10.2.0/0002-Revert-re-PR-target-92095-internal-error-with-O1-mcp.patch >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/8.4.0/0002-Revert-re-PR-target-92095-internal-error-with-O1-mcp.patch >> create mode 100644 package/gcc/9.3.0/0005-Revert-re-PR-target-92095-internal-error-with-O1-mcp.patch > > Applied with the two nits above fixed. Also, did you report this issue > to upstream gcc ? It's reported to upstream gcc [1] but the issue may be located in uClibc. I'm not familiar with such topic, can you have a look? [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98784 Best regards, Romain > > Thanks a lot for this investigation! > > Thomas >