This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote: > HJ, this test is failing on ppc64 with gcc5 due to the size of > .debug_info simply being too small to show any benefit of compression. > > (gdb) set args -I /src/binutils-gdb/ld/testsuite/ld-elf -a64 -mppc64 -many -mbig --compress-debug-sections=zlib -o tmpdir/begin.o begin.s > Breakpoint 9 at 0x1002eda0: file /src/binutils-gdb/gas/write.c, line 1537. > (gdb) r > Starting program: /home/alan/build/ppc/bin/gas/as-new -I /src/binutils-gdb/ld/testsuite/ld-elf -a64 -mppc64 -many -mbig --compress-debug-sections=zlib -o tmpdir/begin.o begin.s > > Breakpoint 9, compress_debug (abfd=0x101b11c0, sec=0x101c7e90, xxx=<optimized out>) at /src/binutils-gdb/gas/write.c:1537 > 1537 if (compressed_size >= uncompressed_size) > (gdb) p compressed_size > $1 = 82 > (gdb) p uncompressed_size > $2 = 82 > (gdb) > > On x86_64 the numbers are 80/82, so even on x86 you're only just > squeaking in a pass. Can you look at using a larger source file for > this test, to make it more robust? Can you try this? I replaced -g with -ggdb3, which generate much bigger .debug_macro section. -- H.J.
Attachment:
compress.patch
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |