diff options
| author | Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> | 2023-05-26 11:51:57 +0930 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> | 2023-05-26 12:14:36 +0930 |
| commit | 9dc7ab5c01347b303c578e0a9221248dbe227b59 (patch) | |
| tree | 3113e4d14319c12eb236b53e4c1a4cda3bb840e6 /ld/plugin.c | |
| parent | 9158e49a70386c3e883ad429d93fe31aa59c0918 (diff) | |
| download | gdb-9dc7ab5c01347b303c578e0a9221248dbe227b59.zip gdb-9dc7ab5c01347b303c578e0a9221248dbe227b59.tar.gz gdb-9dc7ab5c01347b303c578e0a9221248dbe227b59.tar.bz2 | |
PR22263 ld test
A number of targets that I test regularly fail the "Build pr22263-1"
test for various reasons.
arm-linux-gnueabi: "undefined reference to `__aeabi_read_tp'"
ia64-linux-gnu: "Explicit stops are ignored in auto mode"
m68k-linux-gnu: "undefined reference to `__m68k_read_tp'"
microblaze-linux-gnu: "undefined reference to `__tls_get_addr'"
nios2-linux-gnu, s390-linux-gnu and sh4-linux-gnu have a tprel reloc in .got
riscv64-linux-gnu has a dynamic relocation in text
So only riscv really fails the pr. The rest fail due to test issues
or lack of a linker optimisation. Lack of an optimisation isn't
really a fail, but it's worth keeping the test to ensure those
optimisations don't regress. The xfail targets may not be an
exhaustive list. This just tidies test results for those for which I
have cross compilers installed.
PR 22263
* testsuite/ld-elf/tls.exp: Split pr22263 test into two parts,
one to check for -z text errors, the other to check tprel
linker optimisation. Supply needed symbols and assembler flags.
xfail the linker optimisation on targets known to fail.
Diffstat (limited to 'ld/plugin.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions