Failures building glibc with mainline GCC

[Martin Sebor]

On 8/3/21 3:00 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 10:20:49AM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc wrote:
>>> On 8/3/21 9:54 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>>> As discussed, this is a bug indicating that the code generating that
>>>> warning fails to check targetm.addr_space.zero_address_valid to determine
>>>> whether zero or small constant addresses are valid in the given address
>>>> space.
>>>
>>> Yes, we know about that one.  What I'm asking for is the translation
>>> units with the other warnings you showed with the latest GCC (including
>>> the threader patches) on the other targets (including i686 and power).
>>> I don't have an easy way to create them using my setup.
>>
>> But you do have a cfarm account :-)
> 
> And build-many-glibcs.py is designed to be self-contained (depending only
> on the Python 3 standard library and basic native compilation tools), so
> having got a copy from a glibc checkout, you can do (given /some/where as
> the directory in which you want build-many-glibcs.py to do its checkouts
> and builds):
> 
> build-many-glibcs.py /some/where checkout gcc-vcs-mainline
> /some/where/src/glibc/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py /some/where host-libraries
> /some/where/src/glibc/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py --keep=failed /some/where compilers i686-gnu powerpc-linux-gnu powerpc64-linux-gnu
> 
> which will check out all the sources needed to build glibc, using mainline
> GCC, build the GMP/MPFR/MPC host libraries needed by GCC, then build cross
> toolchains for the three listed targets, keeping the build directories
> around for build stages that fail (in this case, the glibc build for those
> targets).
> 

Thanks for the instructions.  I assumed that the purpose of these
automated builders and testers was to help us quickly find and
more easily root cause problems without each of us having to do
builds on all these targets ourselves.  If asking for translation
units to go with the problems your testers uncover is an imposition
I apologize.  In that event, I would suggest to submit bug reports
in Bugzilla instead with the usual details attached there.

Martin