Dear contributor,

Our automatic CI has detected problems related to your patch(es). Please find some details below.

In binutils_build master-arm, after:
  | binutils patch https://patchwork.sourceware.org/patch/135823
  | Author: Sivan Shani <sivan.shani@arm.com>
  | Date:   Wed May 27 13:04:11 2026 +0000
  | 
  |     [PATCH] gas, bfd: Rename Arm v8/v9 architecture tags
  |     
  |     Rename the Arm AEABI CPU architecture tag constants to include the
  |     profile suffix for A-profile architectures. This makes the naming
  |     consistent with existing v8-R and v8-M tag names, while preserving the
  | ... 7 lines of the commit log omitted.
  | ... applied on top of baseline commit:
  | ca85c8b554c gdb/aarch64: record/replay support for LSE128

Produces Failure:
  | Results changed to
  | # reset_artifacts:
  | -10
  | # true:
  | 0
  | # build_abe binutils:
  | # FAILED
  | # First few build errors in logs:
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | # 00:02:24 /home/tcwg-build/workspace/tcwg_gnu_0/abe/snapshots/binutils.git~master/gold/arm.cc:10978:22: error: ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8’ is not a member of ‘elfcpp’; did you mean ‘TAG_CPU_ARCH_V8R’?
  | 
  | From
  | # reset_artifacts:
  | -10
  | # true:
  | 0
  | # build_abe binutils:
  | 1

Used configuration :
 *CI config* tcwg_binutils_build master-arm
 *configure and test flags:* none, autodetected on armv8l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf

If you have any questions regarding this report, please ask on linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org mailing list.

-----------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------8<--------------------------

The information below contains the details of the failures, and the ways to reproduce a debug environment:

You can find the failure logs in
 * http://54.172.246.49:9090/jobs/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-precommit/builds/10218/archive/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/
The full lists of regressions and improvements as well as configure and make commands are in
 * http://54.172.246.49:9090/jobs/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-precommit/builds/10218/archive/artifacts/artifacts.precommit/notify/

Current build   : http://54.172.246.49:9090/jobs/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-precommit/builds/10218/archive/artifacts/
Reference build : http://54.172.246.49:9090/jobs/tcwg_binutils_build--master-arm-build/builds/10183/archive/artifacts/

Warning: we do not enable maintainer-mode nor automatically update
generated files, which may lead to failures if the patch modifies the
master files.