This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
>Can you check whether the .s files produced by 'powerpc-750-linux-gnu-gcc -save-temps struct-ret-1.c' differ between the >good and bad toolchains? And if so, send me both? Target: ppc750 Toolchain 1: crosstool-0.28-rc19, gcc3.3.3 glibc-2.3.2 Toolchain 2: crosstool-0.28-rc19, gcc3.3.3 glibc-2.3.2 without gcc-3.3.2-arm-softfloat.patch Sample Testcase: modified struct-ret-1.c with printf statements (see attached) Complier flag: --static. Both the toolchains output the same .s file for the testcase. When executed on target, toolchain 1 binary prints garbage and toolchain 2 binary prints expected output. For toolchain 1, the testcase compares garbage values and succeeds or aborts and for toolchain 2 the testcase compares valid output and always succeeds. Thanks -kunjan -----Original Message----- From: Dan Kegel [mailto:dank@kegel.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 8:08 AM To: Dan Kegel Cc: Kunjan Naik; 'crossgcc@sources.redhat.com' Subject: Re: floating point operations in gcc 3.3.3, glibc 2.3.2 Dan Kegel wrote: > Daniel Kegel wrote: > >> Kunjan Naik wrote: >> >>>>> I bet gcc-3.3.2-arm-softfloat.patch is the culprit. >>> >>> Indeed it is. > > > I don't understand :-( > I finally looked inside that patch, and it only affects > gcc/config/arm, > there's no > generic part. How the heck could it cause ppc750 failures? > > OK, now I'm curious. I assume the testcase that was failing is > gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/struct-ret-1.c > I'm going to build gcc-3.3.3 with and without that patch, > and look at the output of 'powerpc-750-linux-gnu-gcc -S > struct-ret-1.c' to see if it changes. There were no changes. Thus I am uncertain whether this patch was the problem. Kunjan, how did you verify the toolchain no longer has the problem? Can you check whether the .s files produced by 'powerpc-750-linux-gnu-gcc -save-temps struct-ret-1.c' differ between the good and bad toolchains? And if so, send me both? - Dan -- My technical stuff: http://kegel.com My politics: see http://www.misleader.org for examples of why I'm for regime change
Attachment:
struct-ret-1.c
Description: Binary data
------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |