From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id zt0RIcxwimcYZRIAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:01:32 -0500 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=unseen.parts header.i=@unseen.parts header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=sig header.b=oThL+B9A; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7921F1E100; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:01:32 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B0001E08E for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:01:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1F843847712 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 15:01:30 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A1F843847712 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key, secure) header.d=unseen.parts header.i=@unseen.parts header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=sig header.b=oThL+B9A Received: from minute.unseen.parts (minute.unseen.parts [IPv6:2a01:7e01:e001:66::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 520543847705; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 15:00:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 520543847705 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=unseen.parts Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=unseen.parts ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 520543847705 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2a01:7e01:e001:66::1 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1737126053; cv=none; b=hUTHQPrwCsLqWps2MIbV9WpYfsK13IJQHW842ETGy6TtYojIlEJX5xu4lbV96cv1Mm0qRMpYpJw4jM3+bqSPwydmGUlP7T6DWIASLMIsuGwr6IahCpgbwllm8rE89ivHLO1mNBHLCBiR/1TvjKcbut+3luvro82qdul/a6UwImQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1737126053; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YQIoTTyXAAgRDxs6VIrdnZ3ECGd/UsJc6scy26fNRFc=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=iqXdcVBiJt64+h/pZuuyXCnurCWZUzhuFHMl/59Nl9cR+YkidkPucJFnxE2hDae+bT6aPkpUngk/w0r5H7n1JLA391Wk7Jpi/ly7CA3ImHSqs3lK5kMNyJkFZE4fdojTdjHZzQ8YaA5aXnAQJu9BhLHxPuf3letwz0AM7CHOMFQ= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 520543847705 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=unseen.parts; s=sig; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=cIAY41rFfBQskudYXcGRISj7zqQnQrlth6k2Zk64DB0=; b=oThL+B9A2os4eZjzV1LSjIN3Lu 8L/34BbL3/uej4Tv3ylt0+OOVd2/OFdb3eRs76ZMM8viUGDxqT2dOHeV+K1c+GvmIIISvOPwnwde+ T3ePWwy9zTveiCE3Pd/VDdvUysM8x4rSeCMLI0Qc7Hx6216N793AuoYqMJRDl4tSqaiKPFx5BT41y JWaIIJfp7SgcO657AZ0DibszkUBnaMdZl5mrQsKhNI/LpcAOLg+PhT80SPgS71Xr/QMtrr/hXw1Rp qM5oUkTef7krq7BcoDO3x0naJVybEcVndqkAVzNzL6tybePodRO+f/OI8D6dZoxbkENgqZEKfYod/ mqHsJS4Q==; Received: from minute.unseen.parts ([139.162.151.61]:56076 helo=minute) by minute.unseen.parts with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1tYnq6-0005Gh-0J; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:00:50 +0100 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:00:48 +0100 From: Ivan Kokshaysky To: Sam James Cc: binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] alpha, ld: remove -taso option Message-ID: References: <87tt9xjy4f.fsf@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tt9xjy4f.fsf@gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 02:47:28PM +0000, Sam James wrote: > Ivan Kokshaysky writes: ... > > diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp > > index 58fedb1d36b..54efe51fbaa 100644 > > --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp > > +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp > > @@ -26,12 +26,6 @@ set endian "auto" > > > > set formats {binary ihex srec tekhex verilog} > > > > -if {[istarget "alpha*-*-*"]} { > > - # SREC etc cannot handle 64-bit addresses. Force the test > > - # program into the low 31 bits of the address space. > > - lappend options "ldflags=-Wl,-taso" > > -} > > Is this part right? SREC is a debugging format, so if we're going to do > this, we'd need to drop the SREC format, or accept it's going to be > untested, I think? Yes, this test will be skipped just like on any other 64-bit architecture. But if we keep it, it would fail with linux kernels starting from v6.14. > Adding gdb-patches@. > > > [...] > > thanks, > sam Ivan.