| Message ID | 20220910135256.1689860-1-giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/2] toolchain/Config.in: update gcc bug 90620 | expand |
Giulio, All, On 2022-09-10 15:52 +0200, Giulio Benetti spake thusly: > Gcc bug 90620 reappeared with gcc 11.x so let's update > BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 conditions. > > Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> > --- > toolchain/Config.in | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/toolchain/Config.in b/toolchain/Config.in > index fbc2f28553..16e358344d 100644 > --- a/toolchain/Config.in > +++ b/toolchain/Config.in > @@ -168,11 +168,12 @@ config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 > > # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90620 > # ICE: in do_output_reload, at reload1.c:7978 on microblaze. > -# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x > +# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x but reappeared in gcc 11.x > config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 > bool > - default y if BR2_microblaze > - depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 > + default y if !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 > + default y if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 > + depends on BR2_microblaze I am not sure why the switch of default to depends is needed, because the same condition can still be written without changing the default: default y if BR2_microblaze depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 \ || BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 Yeah, I see that other symbols that have a dependency on two gcc version have the default/depends inverted, but symbols that have a dependency on a single gcc version do not, e.g.: config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 bool default y if BR2_microblaze depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_7 So, I think it is better to keep the same semantics between the two situations. So, I fixed that, and applied to master, thanks. Note, there is also a third way to write it, and obviouslty we are also using that: config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_93847 bool default y if BR2_nios2 && !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_9 Meh... :-( Note: this is *not* a plea for patches to fix that, at all. I just like ranting a bit. ;-) Regards, Yann E. MORIN. > # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93847 > # ICE: compiler error: Segmentation fault on Nios II. This bug > -- > 2.34.1 > > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot@buildroot.org > https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
On 11/09/22 21:30, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Giulio, All, > > On 2022-09-10 15:52 +0200, Giulio Benetti spake thusly: >> Gcc bug 90620 reappeared with gcc 11.x so let's update >> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 conditions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> >> --- >> toolchain/Config.in | 7 ++++--- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/toolchain/Config.in b/toolchain/Config.in >> index fbc2f28553..16e358344d 100644 >> --- a/toolchain/Config.in >> +++ b/toolchain/Config.in >> @@ -168,11 +168,12 @@ config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 >> >> # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90620 >> # ICE: in do_output_reload, at reload1.c:7978 on microblaze. >> -# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x >> +# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x but reappeared in gcc 11.x >> config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 >> bool >> - default y if BR2_microblaze >> - depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 >> + default y if !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 >> + default y if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 >> + depends on BR2_microblaze > > I am not sure why the switch of default to depends is needed, because the > same condition can still be written without changing the default: > > default y if BR2_microblaze > depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 \ > || BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 It was an attempt to propose a standard shape to use here > Yeah, I see that other symbols that have a dependency on two gcc version > have the default/depends inverted, but symbols that have a dependency on > a single gcc version do not, e.g.: > > config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 > bool > default y if BR2_microblaze > depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_7 > > So, I think it is better to keep the same semantics between the two > situations. > > So, I fixed that, and applied to master, thanks. Thank you > Note, there is also a third way to write it, and obviouslty we are also > using that: > > config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_93847 > bool > default y if BR2_nios2 && !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_9 > > Meh... :-( Exactly :-) > Note: this is *not* a plea for patches to fix that, at all. I just like > ranting a bit. ;-) Why don't we choose a standard way instead? This for next patches, or even to send a patchset to keep consistency between all the bugs, but I know that it doesn't add anything and can add regressions. What do you think? Best regards
Giulio, All, On 2022-09-11 21:43 +0200, Giulio Benetti spake thusly: > On 11/09/22 21:30, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > >On 2022-09-10 15:52 +0200, Giulio Benetti spake thusly: > >>Gcc bug 90620 reappeared with gcc 11.x so let's update > >>BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 conditions. [--SNIP--] > >>- default y if BR2_microblaze > >>- depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 > >>+ default y if !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 > >>+ default y if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 > >>+ depends on BR2_microblaze > > > >I am not sure why the switch of default to depends is needed, because the > >same condition can still be written without changing the default: > > default y if BR2_microblaze > > depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 \ > > || BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 > It was an attempt to propose a standard shape to use here Yes, yes, I see that it looked like other similar cases around it. But my point is that, this make symbols with a single or with two dependencies on gcc versions differ: - the former have a deault on the arch, and depends on the gcc versions, - while the latter have a default on gcc versins, and a depends on the arch. [--SNIP--] > >Note: this is *not* a plea for patches to fix that, at all. I just like > >ranting a bit. ;-) > Why don't we choose a standard way instead? This for next patches, or > even to send a patchset to keep consistency between all the bugs, but > I know that it doesn't add anything and can add regressions. > > What do you think? I a not even sure what the best is. The best is that they all folow the same logic, but we currently have (at least) three. The question is: what is the most important and defining dependency: the arch or the gcc versions? I'd argue that, for those microblaze-related bugs, the arch is more important than the gcc version, so the default should be on the arch, and the depends on the gcc versions. So, if I were to handle following changes in that area, that's what I'd like to see. But others may se things differently. It's a rather ad-hoc situation anyway. And no, no patch to standardise that. Thanks! Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
>>>>> "Giulio" == Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> writes: > Gcc bug 90620 reappeared with gcc 11.x so let's update > BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 conditions. > Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> Committed to 2022.02.x, 2022.05.x and 2022.08.x, thanks.
diff --git a/toolchain/Config.in b/toolchain/Config.in index fbc2f28553..16e358344d 100644 --- a/toolchain/Config.in +++ b/toolchain/Config.in @@ -168,11 +168,12 @@ config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90620 # ICE: in do_output_reload, at reload1.c:7978 on microblaze. -# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x +# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x but reappeared in gcc 11.x config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 bool - default y if BR2_microblaze - depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 + default y if !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 + default y if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 + depends on BR2_microblaze # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93847 # ICE: compiler error: Segmentation fault on Nios II. This bug
Gcc bug 90620 reappeared with gcc 11.x so let's update BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 conditions. Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> --- toolchain/Config.in | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)