From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68FA5ECAAD3 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE581424DD; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org EE581424DD X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4tNo_s5wXXvh; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA7141DB9; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 5BA7141DB9 Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C79E41BF281 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0075843C0 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org B0075843C0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DRVUP3ba99tx for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org CF488843B3 Received: from smtpcmd0872.aruba.it (smtpcmd0872.aruba.it [62.149.156.72]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF488843B3 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 19:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.50.173] ([146.241.22.4]) by Aruba Outgoing Smtp with ESMTPSA id XSrmoezRWMW5FXSrmoxeYO; Sun, 11 Sep 2022 21:43:43 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2022 21:43:42 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.1 Content-Language: en-US To: "Yann E. MORIN" References: <20220910135256.1689860-1-giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> <20220911193046.GH898622@scaer> From: Giulio Benetti In-Reply-To: <20220911193046.GH898622@scaer> X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfDK6hbiYKlrfZAbCO8yaa5Lo8Lcct4/XxgHRuaWWNHKPMTOoy5al0VR//J5Ydbx8F5n/1I0mw+n6JEGBFhlg6TuYoxY+IailaVno+YYeW0Q+KSVcXdVd mugO2pi+3x9SVyCkgYhGh3loGoKqRJoQ0I0qXBx9n1ZupW9JV/9t3iW0T8wET1onBdCfbkuv+kwbAtPqagsbGM7sR1OasaESLFd7sHULT82eBdwcceP+9WXp zahFVA402RKB3B5NtsJ+EjnRWitqpaT3r6XSqy2l/uT3DsIdNiwaoqbqfRjGVdrbLGI31j7GIB4SqMIVTpK9qyxwHDiSYUsFcergI4orFl8AXh3GJCEh9hYZ QOaX8b34H8T1qmF5dOpH1NOCWZNL7IBezvO8k6P++7+QFJZrGbAsMC+D7FI5VliKLHfan9c78smVZQ29QSpT4kUs3ekbCg== X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=aruba.it; s=a1; t=1662925423; bh=TMXijp8cmAeyRRYWms5kYDiUfc3Hq1khkUDdUqNz0Js=; h=Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; b=KUaCw3w5tNbDwXuP7LHQ4BuJGv6BCxL/C8vfH4PvZz6pZmALpJFbGsRdzytQDPog7 GogkFot2rmWjdmmuMmqOTlx0zbPbqdaSgRnjxaHOHDEtWyKdxycJGbt0NDpSXCxaUa XWxnqyQeG0BtX2qxVgmwz44/DOHjcOegTevgW3FrmJEin0cruA4FJJm2SLrB3N7isC gYUO+Qr6k0zJM3+T3lAd0xmm/No40NpbBgO/JC2eh9+FPQegUajUvN+rlEoU3oqZPD URCMEZDKSYy3RxVzhTLVXlym/u45+B0nCpW7PpuMrDee+Wm1ThAARzIrcIg4+exRpI e4ydjrPBXeJQQ== X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=aruba.it header.i=@aruba.it header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=a1 header.b=KUaCw3w5 Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] toolchain/Config.in: update gcc bug 90620 X-BeenThere: buildroot@buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Seiderer , Julien Corjon , Thomas Petazzoni , buildroot@buildroot.org, Romain Naour , Thomas De Schampheleire Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" On 11/09/22 21:30, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Giulio, All, > > On 2022-09-10 15:52 +0200, Giulio Benetti spake thusly: >> Gcc bug 90620 reappeared with gcc 11.x so let's update >> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 conditions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti >> --- >> toolchain/Config.in | 7 ++++--- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/toolchain/Config.in b/toolchain/Config.in >> index fbc2f28553..16e358344d 100644 >> --- a/toolchain/Config.in >> +++ b/toolchain/Config.in >> @@ -168,11 +168,12 @@ config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 >> >> # https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90620 >> # ICE: in do_output_reload, at reload1.c:7978 on microblaze. >> -# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x >> +# This bug no longer exists in gcc 10.x but reappeared in gcc 11.x >> config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_90620 >> bool >> - default y if BR2_microblaze >> - depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 >> + default y if !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 >> + default y if BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 >> + depends on BR2_microblaze > > I am not sure why the switch of default to depends is needed, because the > same condition can still be written without changing the default: > > default y if BR2_microblaze > depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_10 \ > || BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_11 It was an attempt to propose a standard shape to use here > Yeah, I see that other symbols that have a dependency on two gcc version > have the default/depends inverted, but symbols that have a dependency on > a single gcc version do not, e.g.: > > config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_85862 > bool > default y if BR2_microblaze > depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_7 > > So, I think it is better to keep the same semantics between the two > situations. > > So, I fixed that, and applied to master, thanks. Thank you > Note, there is also a third way to write it, and obviouslty we are also > using that: > > config BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_GCC_BUG_93847 > bool > default y if BR2_nios2 && !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_GCC_AT_LEAST_9 > > Meh... :-( Exactly :-) > Note: this is *not* a plea for patches to fix that, at all. I just like > ranting a bit. ;-) Why don't we choose a standard way instead? This for next patches, or even to send a patchset to keep consistency between all the bugs, but I know that it doesn't add anything and can add regressions. What do you think? Best regards -- Giulio Benetti Benetti Engineering sas _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot