Bogus openembedded gcc patch
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 1037243108.4336.1453770172960.JavaMail.zimbra-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Re-sending with oe-core ML in CC.
Quoted 50 lines · ----- On Jan 25, 2016, at 8:02 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers…
Hi,
We are noticing the presence of the following patch in various openembedded gcc versions:
0024-PR-target-32219.patch
"From
e0d15f4f8bf28c351b9215ca37f1caa24df0e1fdMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Khem Raj <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:18:54 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 24/35] PR target/32219*
varasm.c(default_binds_local_p_1): Weak data is not local.Signed-off-by Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Khem Raj <[email protected]>Upstream-Status: Backport"
However, contrarily to its "Backport" status, that patch is not upstream in gcc, and we're starting to wonder if this would be the patch that breaks handling of start/stop automatic hidden symbols we use in lttng-ust.
We are only experiencing problems on the various openembedded compilers, but on no other distro (with same compiler versions), which leads us to suspect a buggy distro-specific gcc patch.
We've been testing with openembedded gcc-4.9.2-r0.
The original gold linker issue that this patch was trying to address seems to have been fixed in the gold linke since then.
Refs:
http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/2014-May/023112.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-05/msg00042.html
http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=3cb2b003db7371b3a47d02c08352a262e1e419b4
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435Thoughts ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com --
Quoted 37 lines · Mathieu Desnoyers
Hi,
We are noticing the presence of the following patch in various openembedded gcc versions:
0024-PR-target-32219.patch
"From
e0d15f4f8bf28c351b9215ca37f1caa24df0e1fdMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Khem Raj <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:18:54 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 24/35] PR target/32219*
varasm.c(default_binds_local_p_1): Weak data is not local.Signed-off-by Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Khem Raj <[email protected]>Upstream-Status: Backport"
However, contrarily to its "Backport" status, that patch is not upstream in gcc, and we're starting to wonder if this would be the patch that breaks handling of start/stop automatic hidden symbols we use in lttng-ust.
We are only experiencing problems on the various openembedded compilers, but on no other distro (with same compiler versions), which leads us to suspect a buggy distro-specific gcc patch.
We've been testing with openembedded gcc-4.9.2-r0.
The original gold linker issue that this patch was trying to address seems to have been fixed in the gold linke since then.
Quoted 7 lines
Refs:
http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/2014-May/023112.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-05/msg00042.html
http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=3cb2b003db7371b3a47d02c08352a262e1e419b4
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435Thoughts ?
OE has defaulted to gcc5 since last release, and gold issue is fixed in binutils 2.25 which is what we use in 2.0 as well so it might be OK to unbolt this fix. Although I am not sure about the original problem reported in PR32219 is fixed for gcc 4.9 if we remove this fix. Have you narrowed down your issue to this patch ? if not, then it would be good to do so
Quoted 9 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 51287CFC-6F3C-43B1-9190-84F3B20C192E-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
Quoted 3 lines · Khem Raj
Quoted 3 lines
On Jan 25, 2016, at 8:02 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers <
Quoted 31 lines · [email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 31 lines
Hi,
We are noticing the presence of the following patch in various openembedded gcc versions:
0024-PR-target-32219.patch
"From
e0d15f4f8bf28c351b9215ca37f1caa24df0e1fdMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Khem Raj <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:18:54 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 24/35] PR target/32219*
varasm.c(default_binds_local_p_1): Weak data is not local.Signed-off-by Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Khem Raj <[email protected]>Upstream-Status: Backport"
However, contrarily to its "Backport" status, that patch is not upstream in gcc, and we're starting to wonder if this would be the patch that breaks handling of start/stop automatic hidden symbols we use in lttng-ust.
We are only experiencing problems on the various openembedded compilers, but on no other distro (with same compiler versions), which leads us to suspect a buggy distro-specific gcc patch.
We've been testing with openembedded gcc-4.9.2-r0.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
The original gold linker issue that this patch was trying to address seems to have been fixed in the gold linke since then.
Refs:
http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/2014-May/023112.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-05/msg00042.html
http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=3cb2b003db7371b3a47d02c08352a262e1e419b4
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435
Thoughts ?
OE has defaulted to gcc5 since last release, and gold issue is fixed in
binutils 2.25
Quoted 1 line
which is what we use in 2.0 as well so it might be OK to unbolt this fix.
Although I am not sure
Quoted 1 line
about the original problem reported in PR32219 is fixed for gcc 4.9 if we
remove this fix.
Quoted 1 line
Have you narrowed down your issue to this patch ? if not, then it would
be good to do so
See http://gcc.gnu.org/PR32219 this is fixed for at least 6.0 so should certainly be dropped for any fixed GCC. Not sure if anybody is willing to backport this one, you might ask.
Thanks,
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 10 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Quoted 45 lines · ----- On Jan 26, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Khem Raj…
Quoted 37 lines
On Jan 25, 2016, at 8:02 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
We are noticing the presence of the following patch in various openembedded gcc versions:
0024-PR-target-32219.patch
"From
e0d15f4f8bf28c351b9215ca37f1caa24df0e1fdMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Khem Raj <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:18:54 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 24/35] PR target/32219*
varasm.c(default_binds_local_p_1): Weak data is not local.Signed-off-by Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Khem Raj <[email protected]>Upstream-Status: Backport"
However, contrarily to its "Backport" status, that patch is not upstream in gcc, and we're starting to wonder if this would be the patch that breaks handling of start/stop automatic hidden symbols we use in lttng-ust.
We are only experiencing problems on the various openembedded compilers, but on no other distro (with same compiler versions), which leads us to suspect a buggy distro-specific gcc patch.
We've been testing with openembedded gcc-4.9.2-r0.
The original gold linker issue that this patch was trying to address seems to have been fixed in the gold linke since then.
Quoted 8 lines
OE has defaulted to gcc5 since last release, and gold issue is fixed in binutils 2.25
which is what we use in 2.0 as well so it might be OK to unbolt this fix. Although I am not sure
about the original problem reported in PR32219 is fixed for gcc 4.9 if we remove this fix.
Have you narrowed down your issue to this patch ? if not, then it would be good to do so
Yes, we have narrowed down our problem to this specific patch by removing the patch from the OE gcc patches, rebuilding gcc, and then building our test program with that gcc. The problem goes away when we do so, which points directly to that patch as a culprit.
Test program is attached.
Faulty[gcc 4.9-r0 with patch 0024]:
main: myvar addr=0x600c90 __start___test=0x600c90
fct: myvar addr=0x7f8733d1eae8 __start___test=0x600c90
fct2: myvar addr=0x7f8733d1eaec __start___test=0x600c90
fct3: myvar addr=0x600c94 __start___test=0x600c90
Valid[gcc 4.9-r0 without patch 0024]:
main: myvar addr=0x600c60 __start___test=0x600c60
fct: myvar addr=0x7fb62c758a90 __start___test=0x7fb62c758a90
fct2: myvar addr=0x7fb62c758a94 __start___test=0x7fb62c758a90
fct3: myvar addr=0x600c64 __start___test=0x600c60
Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 10 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 3 lines
Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 433937130.5072.1453838389504.JavaMail.zimbra-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Quoted 4 lines · Mathieu Desnoyers
Quoted 1 line · ----- On Jan 26, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Khem Raj…
Quoted 1 line
On Jan 25, 2016, at 8:02 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers <
mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]>
Quoted 32 lines
Quoted 32 lines
Quoted 32 lines
wrote:
Hi,
We are noticing the presence of the following patch in various openembedded gcc versions:
0024-PR-target-32219.patch
"From
e0d15f4f8bf28c351b9215ca37f1caa24df0e1fdMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Khem Raj <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:18:54 +0400
Subject: [PATCH 24/35] PR target/32219*
varasm.c(default_binds_local_p_1): Weak data is not local.Signed-off-by Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Khem Raj <[email protected]>Upstream-Status: Backport"
However, contrarily to its "Backport" status, that patch is not upstream in gcc, and we're starting to wonder if this would be the patch that breaks handling of start/stop automatic hidden symbols we use in lttng-ust.
We are only experiencing problems on the various openembedded compilers, but on no other distro (with same compiler versions), which leads us to suspect a buggy distro-specific gcc patch.
We've been testing with openembedded gcc-4.9.2-r0.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines
The original gold linker issue that this patch was trying to address seems to have been fixed in the gold linke since then.
Refs:
http://lists.lttng.org/pipermail/lttng-dev/2014-May/023112.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2014-05/msg00042.html
http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=3cb2b003db7371b3a47d02c08352a262e1e419b4
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435
Thoughts ?
OE has defaulted to gcc5 since last release, and gold issue is fixed in
binutils
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
2.25
which is what we use in 2.0 as well so it might be OK to unbolt this
fix.
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Although I am not sure
about the original problem reported in PR32219 is fixed for gcc 4.9 if
we remove
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
this fix.
Have you narrowed down your issue to this patch ? if not, then it would
be good
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 1 line
to do so
Yes, we have narrowed down our problem to this specific patch by removing the patch from the OE gcc patches, rebuilding gcc, and then building our test program with that gcc. The problem goes away when we do so, which points directly to that patch as a culprit.
Test program is attached.
Ok I think we can remove this from master and jethro release
Quoted 34 lines
Faulty[gcc 4.9-r0 with patch 0024]:
main: myvar addr=0x600c90 __start___test=0x600c90
fct: myvar addr=0x7f8733d1eae8 __start___test=0x600c90
fct2: myvar addr=0x7f8733d1eaec __start___test=0x600c90
fct3: myvar addr=0x600c94 __start___test=0x600c90Valid[gcc 4.9-r0 without patch 0024]:
main: myvar addr=0x600c60 __start___test=0x600c60
fct: myvar addr=0x7fb62c758a90 __start___test=0x7fb62c758a90
fct2: myvar addr=0x7fb62c758a94 __start___test=0x7fb62c758a90
fct3: myvar addr=0x600c64 __start___test=0x600c60Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 10 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): CAMKF1sofnyADcNkAc+YrXjPED=ALxf60oPEsuQiJTAY87oB31Q-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org
Quoted 10 lines · Khem Raj
Quoted 7 lines
Yes, we have narrowed down our problem to this specific patch by removing the patch from the OE gcc patches, rebuilding gcc, and then building our test program with that gcc. The problem goes away when we do so, which points directly to that patch as a culprit.
Test program is attached.
Ok I think we can remove this from master and jethro release
Mathieu, as you found this do you want the glory by submitting a the removal patch?
Cheerss,
Ross
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): CAJTo0LZazTzkp94ASdACaBOuC4JpNWCpnf46kAucjY5B+wX2vQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org
Quoted 8 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Khem Raj
Quoted 5 lines
Yes, we have narrowed down our problem to this specific patch by removing the patch from the OE gcc patches, rebuilding gcc, and then building our test program with that gcc. The problem goes away when we do so, which points directly to that patch as a culprit.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Test program is attached.
Ok I think we can remove this from master and jethro release
Mathieu, as you found this do you want the glory by submitting a the removal patch?
Thanks for asking, but for me a
in the patch commit messge is good enough.
You'll probably want to have a link to this discussion thread also in the commit message.
Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 2 lines
Cheerss,
Ross
Signature · 3 lines
Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 883932458.5623.1453895978760.JavaMail.zimbra-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Quoted 17 lines · Mathieu Desnoyers
Quoted 8 lines · Ross
Quoted 5 lines · Khem Raj
Quoted 5 lines
Yes, we have narrowed down our problem to this specific patch by removing the patch from the OE gcc patches, rebuilding gcc, and then building our test program with that gcc. The problem goes away when we do so, which points directly to that patch as a culprit.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Test program is attached.
Ok I think we can remove this from master and jethro release
Mathieu, as you found this do you want the glory by submitting a the removal patch?
Quoted 7 lines
Thanks for asking, but for me a
in the patch commit messge is good enough.
You'll probably want to have a link to this discussion thread also in the commit message.
I have a few minutes in front of me, I'll prepare a patch.
Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 16 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 2 lines
Cheerss,
Ross--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
Signature · 3 lines
Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 809092932.5736.1453901457659.JavaMail.zimbra-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Quoted 2 lines · Mathieu Desnoyers
----- On Jan 27, 2016, at 6:59 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers <
Quoted 2 lines · mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 2 lines
----- On Jan 27, 2016, at 6:31 AM, Burton, Ross <[email protected]>
Quoted 10 lines · wrote:
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 10 lines · Khem Raj
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Yes, we have narrowed down our problem to this specific patch by removing the patch from the OE gcc patches, rebuilding gcc, and then building our test program with that gcc. The problem goes away when we do so, which points directly to that patch as a culprit.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Test program is attached.
Ok I think we can remove this from master and jethro release
Mathieu, as you found this do you want the glory by submitting a the
removal patch?
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Thanks for asking, but for me a
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
in the patch commit messge is good enough.
You'll probably want to have a link to this discussion thread also in the commit message.I have a few minutes in front of me, I'll prepare a patch.
Ok. I think for jethro and master its ok, for other branches. This needs testing
Quoted 31 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 16 lines
Thanks,
Mathieu
Quoted 4 lines
Cheerss,
Ross--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.comQuoted 4 lines
_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core-ZwoEplunGu3dfDuKDZ/[email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core