Re: toolchain/58411: GCC/x86_64 10.5 and 12.4 miscompile GCC/sh3 12.4

[Rin Okuyama <rokuyama.rk%gmail.com@localhost>]

On 2024/08/17 14:21, matthew green wrote:
> for GCC 10 there shouldn't be a problem.
>
> the relevant function was changed from "int" to "bool" return
> between 10 and 12, but the sh backend had an awful ugly "extern"
> in the .cc file instead of including the right header. [*]
>
> so while the problem exist with GCC 10, the "awful ugly" part
> is at least identical and does not cause a problem.
>
> ie, i don't object to a pullup/etc but i don't think it matters.

Ah, you are right. I'd wrongly assumed that these functions are
already bool for GCC 10.x. I will leave gcc.old as is.

How about these?:

On 2024/08/16 20:35, Rin Okuyama wrote:
> On 2024/08/11 17:07, matthew green wrote:
>> 
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=f49267e1636872128249431e9e5d20c0908b7e8e
>>
>> which seems to fix some optimisation pass issues, and could be merged
>> into
>> our GCC 12 i think.
>>
>>
>> 
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=58b78cf068b3b24c11d7812a5f4de865e9cdb8b4
>>
>> which looks like the future has some code-size reduction coming, but
>> maybe not until GCC 14 or 15...
>
> I've confirmed that there's no new regression for ATF on landisk
> built with GCC 12.4, both with and without these changes.
>
> Also, some pkgsrc's can be built natively on system built with
> these upstream commits.

Would it be better to cherry-pick before switch sh3 to 12.4?

Thanks,
rin