Re: Setting a date for the 2.31 branch

[Jim Wilson <jimw at sifive dot com>]

On 06/15/2018 02:29 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> riscv64:
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp ...
> FAIL: PIE PR ld/14525
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/indirect.exp ...
> FAIL: Run indirect5 1
> FAIL: Run indirect5 2
> FAIL: indirect5a dynsym
> FAIL: indirect5b dynsym
> FAIL: Run indirect5 3
> FAIL: Run indirect5 4
> FAIL: indirect5c dynsym
> FAIL: indirect5d dynsym
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ...
> FAIL: Run pr21964-4
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/tls.exp ...
> FAIL: Build pr22263-1
> Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-scripts/size.exp ...
> FAIL: ld-scripts/size-1

I see only 8 failures on Fedora and it is a slightly different set.  I 
don't have a debian system running yet, but I hope to set one up for my 
use in a few weeks and can look at debian binutils/gcc failures then.

RISC-V is a new target.  I fixed all of the binutils and gas unexpected 
failures.  I'm still working my way through the linker unexpected 
failures.  Most of the remaining Fedora linker failures are PIE related. 
 The last one, size-1, is a problem with alignment and section sizes, 
which gets complicated on RISC-V due to the fact that we delete 
instructions during relaxation.  This one didn't look important, we just 
end up with some extra padding in a section at the end.  The PIE 
failures need to be fixed, but it may take some time.  I have an 
unfinished patch that fixes 4 of these cross, but didn't work native. 
It looks like some kind of got/plt issue which I had trouble debugging 
with printf, so I made a detour to try to get a minimal gdb working so I 
can use it to debug my linker patch and will get back to fixing linker 
testsuite failures at some point.

Jim