From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751283AbWDULlv (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 07:41:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751281AbWDULlv (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 07:41:51 -0400 Received: from gherkin.frus.com ([192.158.254.49]:2067 "EHLO gherkin.frus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751278AbWDULlu (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 07:41:50 -0400 Subject: Re: strncpy (maybe others) broken on Alpha In-Reply-To: <20060421095028.GA8818@bigip.bigip.mine.nu> "from Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer at Apr 21, 2006 11:50:28 am" To: Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 06:41:49 -0500 (CDT) CC: Ivan Kokshaysky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, rth@twiddle.net X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL82 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: <20060421114149.24F5EDBA1@gherkin.frus.com> From: rct@gherkin.frus.com (Bob Tracy) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote: > On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 11:21:27AM +0200, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote: > > The bad news is my test case, compiled with a native gcc version 3.4.4 > > and binutils version 2.16.1 doesn't work as expected. So maybe it's > > combination of gcc/binutils? I'm booting the new kernel just to confirm > > that 3.4.4 and 2.16.1 do not work. > > A native gcc 3.4.4 and binutils 2.16.1 do not work... What should we > try next? I'll try upgrading from gcc-4.0 to gcc-4.1, and if/when that has no effect, I'll go looking for a later binutils in Debian's "unstable" tree (I've already had to go to the "testing" tree to get beyond gcc-3 and binutils-2.15.X). Report to follow later today. Item for consideration: what kind of optimization is enabled for your test case compile vs. what's being used for the kernel build? That's another variable we need to sort out. For what it's worth, I do *not* have CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE enabled: the comment about "watch out for broken compilers" was enough to scare me off while we're trying to chase this down. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Tracy WTO + WIPO = DMCA? http://www.anti-dmca.org rct@frus.com -----------------------------------------------------------------------