[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 Jeremi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jeremip11 at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Alan Modra --- Fixed -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 --- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=fef75122c0fe3abafb99d79a63545c1531f4107c commit fef75122c0fe3abafb99d79a63545c1531f4107c Author: H.J. Lu Date: Sat Jan 27 16:04:34 2018 -0800 Add a testcase for PR ld/22751 Since dummy.o must be placed before -Wl,--whole-archive tmpdir/pr22751.a -Wl,--no-whole-archive to trigger the bug, this patch adds an optional trailing ld options to run_ld_link_exec_tests. PR ld/22751 * testsuite/config/default.exp (INT128_CFLAGS): New. * testsuite/ld-plugin/lto.exp (INT128_CFLAGS): New. Run ld/22751 tests. * testsuite/ld-plugin/pr22751.c: New file. * testsuite/lib/ld-lib.exp (run_ld_link_exec_tests): Add ld trailing options. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 --- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Alan Modra : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=d580dcc7aac21dc8396e8e90ea6d05ec32d6cbb9 commit d580dcc7aac21dc8396e8e90ea6d05ec32d6cbb9 Author: Alan Modra Date: Sun Jan 28 08:03:26 2018 +1030 PR22751, LTO broken for libgcc libcalls So what was happening was that the file added from libgcc.a during the rescan was not put on file_chain. map_input_to_output_sections then doesn't see the file and its sections are treated as discarded. The file_chain list pointer bug was caused by that fact that an archive element claimed by the plugin does not have my_archive set. Or more correctly, the actual archive element does have my_archive set, but this bfd is replaced with a dummy bfd that doesn't have my_archive set. PR 22751 * ldlang.c (find_rescan_insertion): Look past bfds with claim_archive set. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 --- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_30-branch branch has been updated by Nick Clifton : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=cad6449ec5efdb8cf7adb3f44e67712effebb05f commit cad6449ec5efdb8cf7adb3f44e67712effebb05f Author: Nick Clifton Date: Sat Jan 27 14:53:19 2018 + Revert the optimization of the placement of LTO objects as a temporary solution for PR 22751. PR 22751 Revert this change as a temporary solution for this PR: 2017-09-02 Alan Modra * ldlang.h (lang_input_statement_type): Expand comments. (LANG_FOR_EACH_INPUT_STATEMENT): Rewrite without casts. * ldlang.c (lang_for_each_input_file): Likewise. (load_symbols): Set usrdata for archives. (find_rescan_insertion): New function. (lang_process): Trim off and reinsert entries added to file chain when rescanning archives for LTO. * ldmain.c (add_archive_element): Set my_archive input_statement next pointer to last element added. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 --- Comment #4 from Alan Modra --- Sigh, so it seems reverting the patch does fix the problem. I don't know what happened when I attempted the revert earlier today.. Now that I've had a bit more time to look at the problem, it seems the patch is causing _divdi3.o extracted from libgcc.a to not be on the file_chain list. This is the list used by LANG_FOR_EACH_INPUT_STATEMENT in output_section_callback, so the .text section from that file is not seen by map_input_to_output_sections and thus has no output section. Symbols defined in a section without output section are unresolvable (elf-bfd.h:RELOC_FOR_GLOBAL_SYMBOL). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 --- Comment #3 from Alan Modra --- Reverting 1fa4ec6ae7 makes no difference. Indeed, now that I've refreshed my memory on what that patch does, it should not since all it is doing (or at least supposed to be doing!) is reordering the layout of object files. Opening objects, adding their symbols and deciding whether they need including happens before ld gets to the new 1fa4ec6ae7 code.. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|amodra at gmail dot com| Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra --- Uggh. I guess we need to implement the comment I made. "Ideally the recompiled objects ought to be ordered to the same place their IR objects were." -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 Matthias Klose changed: What|Removed |Added CC||doko at debian dot org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/22751] LTO broken for libgcc libcalls
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22751 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2018-01-26 CC||amodra at gmail dot com Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- The problem is --whole-archive libx.a --no-whole-archive -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed -lc -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed ld rescan order is wrong. It rescans -lgcc_s before x.ltrans0.ltrans.o from libx.a. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
