[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2022-11-28 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2022-11-18 Thread law at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-09-11 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kilobyte at angband dot pl --- Comment

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-08-20 Thread belyshev at depni dot sinp.msu.ru via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 Bug 99090 depends on bug 91602, which changed state. Bug 91602 Summary: GCC fails to build for riscv in a combined tree due to misconfigured leb128 support https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91602 What|Removed

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-03-03 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Fixed on the trunk so far.

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-03-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b5040344b9ca609e19ee59ba56cd4af9697a1692 commit r11-7472-gb5040344b9ca609e19ee59ba56cd4af9697a1692 Author: Jakub Jelinek Date:

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-02-26 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 --- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson --- I tested it with a riscv-gnu-toolchain build and check. The 4 -gsplit-dwarf testcases that fail without the patch work with the patch. I also tried a build and check with -gsplit-dwarf enabled by default and

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-02-26 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-02-26 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- Making it work is desirable in any case. But, the emitted debug sections will be in various spots less compact when .uleb128/.sleb128 don't support non-constant operands. Though, I'm afraid the

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-02-26 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 --- Comment #2 from Jim Wilson --- Yes we could have partial uleb128 support. There is only a problem if at least one label is in the code section. There is another proposed solution to add special relaxable relocations for uleb128 but the

[Bug debug/99090] gsplit-dwarf broken on riscv64-linux

2021-02-26 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99090 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1