On 2014/12/24 17:41, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 4:35 PM, zhangjian <bamvor.zhangj...@huawei.com> > wrote: >> Hi, guys >> >> I encounter a gcc failure when I build mysql on opensuse[1] >> 5.6.17/storage/perfschema/pfs_account.cc:320:1: error: could not split insn >> [ 1245s] } >> [ 1245s] ^ >> [ 1245s] (insn 482 1770 1461 (parallel [ >> [ 1245s] (set (reg:SI 1 x1 [orig:167 D.16835 ] [167]) >> [ 1245s] (mem/v:SI (reg/f:DI 0 x0 [orig:166 D.16844 ] [166]) >> [-1 S4 A32])) >> [ 1245s] (set (mem/v:SI (reg/f:DI 0 x0 [orig:166 D.16844 ] >> [166]) [-1 S4 A32]) >> [ 1245s] (unspec_volatile:SI [ >> [ 1245s] (ior:SI (mem/v:SI (reg/f:DI 0 x0 [orig:166 >> D.16844 ] [166]) [-1 S4 A32]) >> [ 1245s] (const_int 0 [0])) >> [ 1245s] (const_int 5 [0x5]) >> [ 1245s] ] UNSPECV_ATOMIC_OP)) >> [ 1245s] (clobber (reg:CC 66 cc)) >> [ 1245s] (clobber (reg:SI 4 x4)) >> [ 1245s] (clobber (reg:SI 3 x3)) >> [ 1245s] ]) >> /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/mysql-5.6.17/include/my_atomic.h:217 1814 >> {atomic_fetch_orsi} >> [ 1245s] (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:CC 66 cc) >> [ 1245s] (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:SI 4 x4) >> [ 1245s] (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:SI 3 x3) >> [ 1245s] (nil))))) >> [ 1245s] >> /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/mysql-5.6.17/storage/perfschema/pfs_account.cc:320:1: >> internal compiler error: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2897 >> >> Ihis bug could be fixed by Michael's patch(r217076): >> 2014-11-04 Michael Collison <michael.colli...@linaro.org> >> >> * config/aarch64/iterators.md (lconst_atomic): New mode attribute >> to support constraints for CONST_INT in atomic operations. >> * config/aarch64/atomics.md >> (atomic_<atomic_optab><mode>): Use lconst_atomic constraint. >> (atomic_nand<mode>): Likewise. >> (atomic_fetch_<atomic_optab><mode>): Likewise. >> (atomic_fetch_nand<mode>): Likewise. >> (atomic_<atomic_optab>_fetch<mode>): Likewise. >> (atomic_nand_fetch<mode>): Likewise. >> >> Michael's patch could be applied on the top of gcc 4.8 branch except the >> gcc/ChangeLog. >> Is it possible backport this patch to gcc 4.8 branch? >> I am new to here, I am not sure if I need send the patch with modified >> ChangeLog. Sorry if I break the rules. Hi, bin > Hi, > Since the patch applies to 4.8 smoothly, and you already provided the > revision number, I don't think an additional patch is needed. But is > the original patch for an existing bug? After check the original discussion, I found that it is a bug reported by d...@ubuntu.com[1]. > And what's about gcc 4_9 > branch? I am not sure. It seems that the original patch is tested on gcc 4.9[1]: --- ../../../../linaro-gcc4_9_git/gcc/config/aarch64/iterators.md 2014-09-22 10:10:04.520258964 -0700 +++ iterators.md 2014-09-16 14:27:10.459050672 -0700 @@ -349,6 +349,9 @@
> Maybe you can create a PR against 4.8 (or 4.9) for tracking. Thanks your suggestion. I am sorry I do not know what should be included in PR and how to create a PR after google. > Another problem is you may need to wait for a while since it's holiday > time. > > Thanks, > bin > regards bamvor [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg02209.html >> >> regards >> >> bamvor >> >> [1] https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=896667 >> > > . >