[Bug binutils/19311] arm-linux-as build on Mac OS X with Xcode7 fails to assemble code from FreePascal cross-compiler
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19311
--- Comment #8 from Loria ---
I found a LLVM Bug, which seems to be at least correlated with the problem I a
encountered:
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24688
I will do some more checks, if it really is.
since it is unknown how many times this bug hits the compiler generated, I
would actually like to disable that type of optimization instead of changing
the correct code to circumwent such compiler issue :/ you never know where it
hits again :/
If the following change would help (will test):
encode_arm_immediate (unsigned int val)
{
unsigned int a, i;
for (i = 0; i < 32; i += 2)
if ((a = rotate_left (val, i)) <= 0xff)
return a | (i << 7); /* 12-bit pack: [shift-cnt,const]. */
return FAIL;
}
changed to:
encode_arm_immediate (unsigned int val)
{
unsigned int a, i;
for (i = 0; i < 16; i++)
if ((a = rotate_left (val, i*2)) <= 0xff)
return a | (i << 8); /* 12-bit pack: [shift-cnt,const]. */
return FAIL;
}
or using the inline funktion instead of a macro ...
Will test those.
--
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 binutils/19311] arm-linux-as build on Mac OS X with Xcode7 fails to assemble code from FreePascal cross-compiler
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19311 --- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Loria, > Investigation so far shows evidence of some problem with loop optimization > of the construct used in "encode_arm_immediate" So this *is* a host compiler bug. Phew! > #define rotate_left(v, n) (v << n | v >> (32 - n)) > for (i = 0; i < 32; i += 2) > if ((a = rotate_left (val, i)) <= 0xff) > return a | (i << 7); /* 12-bit pack: [shift-cnt,const]. */ > return FAIL; > I am looking for a way to either add a workaround or set some optimzerflag > to stop the broken code from beeing submitted. You could try turning rotate_left into an inline function. Cheers Nick -- 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 gas/19520] New: [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 Bug ID: 19520 Summary: [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker Product: binutils Version: 2.26 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: gas Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: ro at TechFak dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE CC: hjl.tools at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Host: i386-pc-solaris2.* Target: i386-pc-solaris2.* Build: i386-pc-solaris2.* The new R_386_GOT32X reloc introduced in binutils 2.26 break gcc mainline bootstrap with gas 2.26 and Solaris ld, which doesn't handle it: ld: fatal: relocation error: file cpuinfo_s.o: section [5].rel.text.startup: invalid relocation type: 0x2b Even if support were introduced, there's guaranteed a large number of older linkers in the field that continue not to support it, so there needs to be a way to disable its generation. Rainer -- 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 gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- Please open a Solaris linker request to support R_386_GOT32X, R_X86_64_GOTPCRELX and R_X86_64_REX_GOTPCRELX. Then we discuss how to address it, depending on the response. -- 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 gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 --- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth --- > --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- > Please open a Solaris linker request to support R_386_GOT32X, > R_X86_64_GOTPCRELX and R_X86_64_REX_GOTPCRELX. Then we discuss > how to address it, depending on the response. I've started just that (at least for R_386_GOT32X for now), but even if this were implemented for Solaris 12, this won't help older installations in the field. This also needs to be addressed on the binutils side. Rainer -- 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 gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #2) > > --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- > > Please open a Solaris linker request to support R_386_GOT32X, > > R_X86_64_GOTPCRELX and R_X86_64_REX_GOTPCRELX. Then we discuss > > how to address it, depending on the response. > > I've started just that (at least for R_386_GOT32X for now), but even if > this were implemented for Solaris 12, this won't help older > installations in the field. This also needs to be addressed on the > binutils side. Understood. I still need a response from Solaris. -- 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 gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- Please checkout users/hjl/pr19520/master branch. I added a configure-time option, --enable-new-x86-relocations, and a run-time option, -mnew-relocations=. -- 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 binutils/19311] arm-linux-as build on Mac OS X with Xcode7 fails to assemble code from FreePascal cross-compiler
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19311 --- Comment #9 from Loria --- Well, how related it is with the named bug is unclear, but it seems the unroll loops just does not work ... on x86_64 I get the following disassemble: _encode_arm_immediate: ## @encode_arm_immediate .cfi_startproc ## BB#0: pushq %rbp Ltmp4: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 16 Ltmp5: .cfi_offset %rbp, -16 movq%rsp, %rbp Ltmp6: .cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp movl%edi, %ecx roll$2, %ecx movl$256, %edx ## imm = 0x100 cmpl$255, %ecx jbe LBB1_1 ## BB#3: movl%edi, %ecx roll$4, %ecx movl$512, %edx ## imm = 0x200 cmpl$256, %ecx ## imm = 0x100 jb LBB1_1 . ## BB#16: roll$30, %edi movl$-1, %eax movl$3840, %edx ## imm = 0xF00 cmpl$256, %edi ## imm = 0x100 movl%edi, %ecx jae LBB1_2 LBB1_1: orl %edx, %ecx movl%ecx, %eax LBB1_2: ## %.loopexit5 popq%rbp retq well it looks like its definitly not a bug of binutils ... its caused by bad unroll-loops of Apple LLVM version 7.0.2 (clang-700.1.81). I think the save workaround would be to add -fno-unroll-loops to the flags for building a toolchain .. with Apple Xcode 7.2 How do you think ? (hopefully they fixed it with the upcoming Xcode 7.3 which unfortunatly wont build for 10.10 anymore. -- 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
