test results with the 2.35 branch for several architectures

[H.J. Lu]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:32 PM Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 04:34:51PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > powerpc:
> > Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-gc/gc.exp ...
> > FAIL: Check --gc-section
> > FAIL: Check --gc-section/-q
> > FAIL: Check --gc-section/-r/-e
> > FAIL: Check --gc-section/-r/-u
>
> I don't see these failures.  Can you show ld.log for these tests?
>
> > powerpc64:
> > Running /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp ...
> > FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841b.so
> > FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841c.so
> > FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841bn.so (-z now)
> > FAIL: Run pr18841 with libpr18841cn.so (-z now)
>
> I don't see these failures using gcc-7.3.1 on RedHat FC27 or gcc-4.8.5
> on FC28 when running the testsuite.  The test does do cross-module
> calls from within an ifunc resolver, which is nasty since the called
> function may not be relocated.  In this case the called function (zoo)
> is just a stub so doesn't need relocating, but on ppc64 the function
> descriptor for zoo in the executable won't be relocated at the time
> the shared library ifunc resolver runs.  That means the test will fail
> if your compiler generates PIEs by default.  I do get segfaults on
> FC27 if I compile the executable as a PIE..
>
> HJ, I think I should change the test to use NOPIE_LDFLAGS and
> NOPIE_CFLAGS.  That shouldn't affect the original purpose of the test,
> which was to ensure proper ifunc dynamic reloc sorting.

Sure.


-- 
H.J.