[Bug 1867173] Re: FTBFS with llvm-10
Huh, sorry. Must have been a mis-click, I just wanted to subscribe to the bug I think. I've removed the flag now. ** Information type changed from Public Security to Public -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1867173 Title: FTBFS with llvm-10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-z-systems/+bug/1867173/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1867173] Re: FTBFS with llvm-10
It seems this was a known common-code issue that is fixed in mainline not in LLVM 10. There's already a bug to port it to 10.0.1 (PR45272) with a back ported patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D76596. Can you try whether this fixes the problem? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1867173 Title: FTBFS with llvm-10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/llvm-toolchain-10/+bug/1867173/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1867173] Re: FTBFS with llvm-10
** Information type changed from Public to Public Security -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1867173 Title: FTBFS with llvm-10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/llvm-toolchain-10/+bug/1867173/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365664] Re: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10
Moving section headers to the end sounds good. However, maybe we should make the bfd_from_remote_memory change too, in order to cope with kernels already in the field? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365664 Title: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdb/+bug/1365664/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365664] Re: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10
On second glance, looks I'm wrong: .symtab and .strtab actually do come *after* the section headers in "normal" executables too. So I guess the best thing to do would be to fix bfd_from_remote_memory to actually include enough memory to cover all sections, even those after the section headers. (Assuming they are actually included in the in-memory size of the VDSO, which bfd_from_remote_memory actually knows.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365664 Title: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdb/+bug/1365664/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365664] Re: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10
Hmmm ... usually, the section headers come at the very end of the file. It's a bit strange that there is section data *after* the headers in this case; maybe that's what confuses GDB/BFD. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365664 Title: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdb/+bug/1365664/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365664] Re: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10
Well, GDB assumes that the VDSO contains the whole ELF *file*, not just
segments that would be loaded into memory if the object were loaded by
the dynamic loader.
In particular, none of the symbol table (.symtab, .strtab) or debug info
sections usually reside in loaded segments, but the debugger of course
has to access them.
When debugging "normal" executables or shared librares, GDB will just
read that information from the file on disk. But for a VSDO, no such
file exists; instead, GDB assumes the full file is actually present in
memory.
("Full file" here means everything covered by any *section*, not just
those that are part of a loaded segment.)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365664
Title:
gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdb/+bug/1365664/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1365664] Re: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10
Anton Blanchard wrote: >I wonder if the gdb complaint about the kernel VDSO is causing the test to >fail. The warning is almost certainly a result of >this kernel patch: > >powerpc: Use unstripped VDSO image for more accurate profiling data Whether or not this complaint is causing that test to fail, it should be fixed. Using an unstripped VDSO image is certainly better than a stripped one, also for debugging purposes. However, it needs to be correct (and complete) -- maybe the VDSO is indeed truncated? Including full debug data, the VDSO may be longer than a page, does the kernel actually map all of it to user space? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1365664 Title: gdb source test suites are failing in Ubuntu14.10 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdb/+bug/1365664/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1354457] Re: ppc64 patch needs an update
So based on this patch: https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2014-04/msg00283.html I think bfd_elf64_powerpc_vec has been renamed to powerpc_elf64_vec. Alan, can you verify? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1354457 Title: ppc64 patch needs an update To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/oprofile/+bug/1354457/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1349907] Re: gcc, powerpc with C++11 standard does not define __linux
So there's two issues: First of all, on amd64: g++ -std=c++0x -dM -E - < /dev/null | grep linux cc1: warning: command line option "-std=c++0x" is valid for C++/ObjC++ but not for C #define __linux 1 #define __linux__ 1 #define __gnu_linux__ 1 #define linux 1 Note the warning? That means the -std=c++0x option is effectively ignored. When you add e.g. -x c++, you'll get instead: g++ -std=c++0x -dM -x c++ -E - < /dev/null | grep linux #define __linux 1 #define __linux__ 1 #define __gnu_linux__ 1 Which is how it should be; in "standard" mode, "linux" is an identifier reserved to user code and must not be pre-defined. However, __linux *should* be predefined. The second issue is that on rs6000, the linux macros are defined in a way that's different than on other platforms. This has the effect that even though we get the warning, the std=c++0x option is still considered to be in effect for the preprocessor defines. In addition, due to the bug you mention above, __linux is only defined in non-standard mode instead of always ... However, given that this has been that way (unfortunately) on rs6000 forever, it is probably best not to rely on the presence of __linux in standard mode, and use __linux__ instead. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1349907 Title: gcc, powerpc with C++11 standard does not define __linux To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.9/+bug/1349907/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 675347] Re: volatile int causes inline assembly build failure
** Changed in: gcc-linaro-tracking Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/675347 Title: volatile int causes inline assembly build failure To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/675347/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 968766] Re: GCC 4.6.3 (cc1) crashes when compiling MPFR 3.1.0
Committed backports to Linaro GCC 4.6 and 4.7. ** Also affects: gcc-linaro/4.6 Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: gcc-linaro/4.7 Importance: Medium Assignee: Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) Status: In Progress ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.6 Importance: Undecided => Medium ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.6 Assignee: (unassigned) => Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.6 Status: New => In Progress ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.6 Milestone: None => 4.6-2012.05 ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.7 Milestone: None => 4.7-2012.05 ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.6 Status: In Progress => Fix Committed ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.7 Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/968766 Title: GCC 4.6.3 (cc1) crashes when compiling MPFR 3.1.0 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/968766/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 972648] Re: ICE (segfault) in gsi_for_stmt
I've checked in a backport of Richard's fix to Linaro GCC 4.6. Other series are not affected. ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Milestone: None => 4.6-2012.05 ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/972648 Title: ICE (segfault) in gsi_for_stmt To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/972648/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 968766] Re: GCC 4.6.3 (cc1) crashes when compiling MPFR 3.1.0
** Branch linked: lp:~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-968766-4.7 ** Branch linked: lp:~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-968766-4.6 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/968766 Title: GCC 4.6.3 (cc1) crashes when compiling MPFR 3.1.0 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/968766/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 972648] Re: ICE (segfault) in gsi_for_stmt
** Branch linked: lp:~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-972648-4.6 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/972648 Title: ICE (segfault) in gsi_for_stmt To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/972648/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 972648] Re: ICE (segfault) in gsi_for_stmt
A minimal (C) test case (with "-O -ftree-vectorize") for me is:
struct test
{
unsigned long exp[0];
};
void test (struct test *a, long b, unsigned long bitmask)
{
if (b > 0)
{
a->exp[0] &= ~bitmask;
a->exp[0] |= b;
}
else
{
a->exp[0] &= ~bitmask;
}
}
The problem here is a bug in the data dependency detection when zero-
sized arrays are involved in an access.
This bug was latent, and got exposed by Ira's patch to improve conditional
store sinking:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg01393.html
The bug was later fixed (inadvertently) by Richard Guenther's data-dependency
fix series, in particular this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01878.html
Since both of these patches are in mainline (and FSF 4.7, and Linaro 4.7), the
bug is not appear there.
Since FSF 4.6 contains neither of those, the bug is latent (without visible
effect) there.
The bug does appear in Linaro 4.6, since we backported Ira's patch but
not Richard's data-dependency fix.
I'll try testing a backport of that fix.
** Changed in: gcc-linaro
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/972648
Title:
ICE (segfault) in gsi_for_stmt
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/972648/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 968766] Re: GCC 4.6.3 (cc1) crashes when compiling MPFR 3.1.0
This affects current FSF mainline as well. I've opened a GCC bugzilla report: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52870 ** Bug watch added: GCC Bugzilla #52870 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52870 ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: Triaged => In Progress -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/968766 Title: GCC 4.6.3 (cc1) crashes when compiling MPFR 3.1.0 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/968766/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 523959] Re: GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel
Yes, the fix is present in GDB 7.4 (and in fact already GDB 7.3) release. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/523959 Title: GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gdb-linaro/+bug/523959/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 600209] Re: getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: Incomplete => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600209 Title: getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/600209/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 937864] Re: Produces NEON code on armhf even when explicitly asked not to
Maybe I'm missing something, but as I understand those *are* valid VFPv3 (even VFPv2) instructions, not just NEON instructions ... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/937864 Title: Produces NEON code on armhf even when explicitly asked not to To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/937864/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 861296] Re: mmap fails to allocate 2030Mb heap on ARM
Note that all this is decided by the kernel's mmap area allocation strategy; see the various "get_unmapped_area" routines in platform- specific kernel code (e.g arch/arm/mm/mmap.c:arch_get_unmapped_area vs. x86/kernel/sys_x86_64.c:arch_get_unmapped_area_topdown). If any change is required here (and this behaviour *was* in fact changed on x86; they used to behave the same way arm still does), it needs to be done on the kernel side. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/861296 Title: mmap fails to allocate 2030Mb heap on ARM To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linaro-toolchain-misc/+bug/861296/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673820] Re: Ethernet dies during large file transfers on vexpress
I've now installed the updated FPGA bitfiles on my VE, and this does indeed appear to fix the problems I've been seeing. Thanks! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673820 Title: Ethernet dies during large file transfers on vexpress To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux-linaro/+bug/673820/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 673820] Re: Ethernet dies during large file transfers on vexpress
I'm running into this issue with failing network connections on vexpress while trying to run the GDB testsuite in remote mode ... Has there been any progress on this bug in the meantime? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/673820 Title: Ethernet dies during large file transfers on vexpress To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux-linaro/+bug/673820/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 684218] Re: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs
I've verified that the problem is fixed with 2.13-0ubuntu9. Thanks! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/684218 Title: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 684218] Re: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs
The main change (support for .ARM.exidx unwind info) is already in Ubuntu GDB (came in with the Linaro GDB merge). There is one minor additional fix (actually a pre-existing bug in the ARM prologue parser exposed by the glibc change) that is not yet in Ubuntu GDB. This extra fix has been committed to mainline GDB: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-03/msg00964.html and also to Linaro GDB (rev. 32997). -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/684218 Title: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 684218] Re: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs
glibc part of the fix is now committed to libc-ports: [PATCH][arm] Create ARM unwind records for system call stubs http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2011-03/msg00035.html http://sourceware.org/ml/glibc-cvs/2011-q1/msg00119.html commit 738860089d5c510f3445f9830d9924ab58659c51 Can this be backported to the Ubuntu eglibc package? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/684218 Title: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 684218] Re: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs
GDB part of the fix now committed. ** Also affects: eglibc (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: gdb-linaro Status: In Progress => Fix Committed ** Changed in: gdb-linaro Milestone: None => 7.2-2011.04-0 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/684218 Title: Failure to backtrace out of glibc system call stubs -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 736354] Re: gdbserver (arm,natty) <-> gdb (ia32,natty) fails
When you say: "On the intel machine using gdb-mutliarch gdb-multiarch /bin/ls" are you actually refering to the Intel copy of /bin/ls ? This will cause GDB to expect to debug Intel architecture, which does not agree with an ARM architecture being reported by the remote stub. You should use a copy of the *ARM* binary on the Intel machine when starting GDB ... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/736354 Title: gdbserver (arm,natty) <-> gdb (ia32,natty) fails -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 728216] Re: GDB fails to get a valid backtrace while debugging a Webkit SIGSEGV
** Changed in: gdb-linaro Status: New => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/728216 Title: GDB fails to get a valid backtrace while debugging a Webkit SIGSEGV -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 728216] Re: GDB fails to get a valid backtrace while debugging a Webkit SIGSEGV
It seems webkit has a JIT that generates assembler code at runtime. The crash happens while executing one of those generated blocks of code. Since there is no debug or unwind information, or even basic symbol information, available for such generated code, there really is not much GDB can do here. In theory, recent GDBs provide an interface for a JIT to register symbol information for generated code at runtime, but it appears the webkit JIT does make use of this. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/728216 Title: GDB fails to get a valid backtrace while debugging a Webkit SIGSEGV -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Milestone: None => 4.5-2011.02-0 ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352 Title: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 598462] Re: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use
It turns out there is no other problem on 4.6. The compiler in the ubuntu-toolchain-r/test ppa does not build Python at all due to PR 47271. After adding the fix for this PR to the ppa package, the compiler runs into the exact same problem as described for 4.5 in the previous comment. By using -fprofile-correction as above, I was able to successfully build the python3.2-3.2~rc1 package with profile-directed feedback enabled (on i386). So to summarize the problems discussed in this thread: - GCC 4.6 had a regression where it failed to built Python at all. This is PR 47271, and is already fixed in mainline. - GCC (any version!) uses thread-unsafe code to update profile counters, which means they can always be slightly wrong when profiling multi- threaded code, and therefore inconsistent with the flow graph. This will happen most frequently on multi-core machines, and in functions that experience high thread contention. The problem can be worked around using -fprofile-correction. Using this flag should enable profiled builds of Python with (at least) GCC 4.5 and 4.6. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/598462 Title: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 598462] Re: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use
I've now reproduced and analyzed the problem on i386 with GCC 4.5, i.e. building python3.2-3.2~rc1 using the 4.5.1-1ubuntu3 compiler. It turns out that there is no particular bug here (the CFG looks identical in the -fprofile-generate and -fprofile-use cases), but instead we're running in a known limitation of the profiling code: it is not thread-safe. This means that when using profiling in a multi-threaded application, profile counters may not be fully accurate since counter updates may have been skipped due to race conditions in accessing the counters. This is consistent with the symptoms we're seeing: the problem disappears on my (single-core) ARM board, but is present on i386/amd64/ppc all of which presumably are built on multi-core machines, which increases the chance of actually running into one of those race conditions. The functions where the problem shows up likewise tend to be places where high thread contention is expected (e.g. synchronization primitives). The recommended way to deal with this problem is to use the -fprofile- correction flag, which will employ heuristics to attempt to adjust incorrect counters, instead of simply aborting compilation. See the manual page: -fprofile-correction Profiles collected using an instrumented binary for multi-threaded programs may be inconsistent due to missed counter updates. When this option is specified, GCC will use heuristics to correct or smooth out such inconsistencies. By default, GCC will emit an error message when an inconsistent profile is detected. I've added the -fprofile-correction flag to the build_all_use_profile rule in Makefile.pre.in, and with this change I was able to successfully build the package (only i386 tested). The issues with 4.6 must be some other problem (note that the profiling code was significantly rewritten between 4.5 and 4.6, so we may well run into new problems here). I'll look into this next. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/598462 Title: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
Backport proposed for merge: https://code.launchpad.net/~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-685352/+merge/46663 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352 Title: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
Upstream GCC patch committed here: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168944 I'll backport to Linaro GCC 4.5. ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: Confirmed => In Progress ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Assignee: (unassigned) => Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352 Title: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: New => Confirmed ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Importance: Undecided => High -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352 Title: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47299 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352 Title: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
Opened upstream gcc bug report PR rtl-optimzation/47299 ** Bug watch added: GCC Bugzilla #47299 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47299 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352 Title: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 685352] Re: libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text rendering
doko asked me to look into this. This is definitely a compiler bug.
The minimal test case I get is:
unsigned short test (unsigned char val) __attribute__ ((noinline));
unsigned short
test (unsigned char val)
{
return val * 255;
}
int
main(int argc, char**argv)
{
printf ("test(val=40) = %x\n", test(0x40));
return 0;
}
When built without optimization, we get (correctly):
test(val=40) = 3fc0
When built with optimization, we get instead:
test(val=40) = ffc0
There is nothing undefined in the source code (unsigned arithmetic has
defined overflow behaviour in C, and in any case, there actually isn't
any overflow in this particular example).
The bug is that GCC realizes that for 8-bit integers, multiplying by 255
is actually the same as just taking the negative value (which is true as
far as it goes, if you only use 8 bits of the results) -- and then
erroneously does the same optimization when we actually need 16 bits of
the result.
This bug seems to have been introduced sometime in the 4.5 cycle, and is
actually still present on current mainline ...
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/685352
Title:
libplymouth2_0.8.2-2ubuntu6 and later give ragged splash and text
rendering
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 598462] Re: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use
I just successfully completed a profiled build of python3.2_3.2~b2-1.dsc on armel Natty using the Ubuntu/Linaro 4.5.1-10ubuntu3 system compiler, so the problem seems to no longer exist on 4.5. Do we still care about 4.4 at this point? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/598462 Title: [PR38292] corrupted profile info with -O[23] -fprofile-use -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 701988] Re: ICE on ix86 (-m64) with Linaro 2011-01
This is probably a duplicate of #701733 ... -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/701988 Title: ICE on ix86 (-m64) with Linaro 2011-01 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 523959] Re: GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel
** Changed in: gdb-linaro Status: In Progress => Fix Committed ** Changed in: gdb-linaro Milestone: None => 7.2-2010.10-0 -- GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/523959 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 523959] Re: GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel
** Changed in: gdb-linaro Assignee: (unassigned) => Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) -- GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/523959 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 523959] Re: GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel
I've now committed a patch to mainline GDB that significantly improves backtraces for Thumb-2 code even in the absence of DWARF CFI debug info. This will still not handle absolutely all cases (e.g. hand-written assembler routines that don't follow usual conventions), but should still help quite a bit: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-10/msg00132.html ** Changed in: gdb-linaro Importance: Undecided => Medium ** Changed in: gdb-linaro Status: New => In Progress -- GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/523959 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.5 Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 600209] Re: getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro
Incrementing ICNTL(14) one by one results in ever decreasing values of INFO(2) in the error return case, down until "40" if the ICNTL(14) line is changed to +=44. When going to += 45, the test case succeeds without error. All this doesn't look like a compiler problem to me, just a configuration issue with those parameters ... -- getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600209 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 600209] Re: getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro
The MUMPS user guide says about error -9: –9 Main internal real/complex workarray S too small. If INFO(2) is positive, then the number of entries that are missing in S at the moment when the error is raised is available in INFO(2). If INFO(2) is negative, then its absolute value should be multiplied by 1 million. If an error -9 occurs, the user should increase the value of ICNTL(14) before calling the factorization (JOB=2) again, except if ICNTL(23) is provided, in which case ICNTL(23) should be increased. and about ICNTL(14): ICNTL(14) is accessed by the host both during the analysis and the factorization phases. It corresponds to the percentage increase in the estimated working space. When significant extra fill-in is caused by numerical pivoting, increasing ICNTL(14) may help. Except in special cases, the default value is 20 (which corresponds to a 20 % increase). In this particular instance, INFO(2) is returned as "332". Increasing the incoming ICNTL(14) a bit more, e.g. by changing the source line mentioned above to add 50 instead of 40, makes the test pass. -- getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600209 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 600209] Re: getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro
Hmm, I was unable to reproduce any failures with getfem++-4.0.0-4ubuntu2
even on your machine.
However, I *am* seeing failures with the current maverick version,
getfem++-4.1-1ubuntu1 :
../bilaplacian /tmp/elas.param_382 -d NX=4 2>&1 failed
FAIL: ../tests/bilaplacian.pl
Running the test directly results in:
| An error has been detected !!! |
Error in ./gmm/gmm_MUMPS_interface.h, line 199 :
Solve with MUMPS failed: error -9, increase ICNTL(14)
This message comes from
template
void MUMPS_solve(const MAT &A, const VECTX &X_, const VECTB &B) {
which is simply a stub to call into the libmumps library; that library actually
signals an error condition.
As to the "ICNTL(14)" mentioned in the error message, there is this interesting
comment in the source:
id.ICNTL(14) += 40; /* small boost to the workspace size as we have
encountered some problem
who did not fit in the default settings of mumps..
by default, ICNTL(14) = 15 or 20
*/
I'll look in more detail into what this libmumps error means.
--
getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600209
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 500524] Re: bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression)
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/500524 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.4 Status: In Progress => Fix Committed -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 600209] Re: getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro
Interesting. I just tried the very same build, and it works for me ... Is the failure reproducible on your system? -- getfem++ fails to build from source in linaro https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600209 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 506358] Re: [armel] unable to find a register to spill in class 'GENERAL_REGS'
g++ -fmessage-length=0 -c -fno-omit-frame-pointer -Os -fno-strict-aliasing datetime.ii succeeds with no error on g++-4.4.real (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-8ubuntu1) 4.4.5 20100728 (prerelease) This might have been fixed by the Linaro compiler ... -- [armel] unable to find a register to spill in class 'GENERAL_REGS' https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506358 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 608125] Re: [armel] gnat-4.4 built from the linaro toolchain fails to build
This actually has nothing to do with Linaro GCC, the problem is simply that a current mainline snapshot cannot compile an unmodified 4.4 branch Ada compiler. On 2010-06-22, revision 161147 was checked into mainline GCC: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=161147 This revision introduces a change to sem_res.adb (Make_Call_Into_Operator), which recognizes a certain type of semantically invalid construct in Ada source code that the compiler previously did not correctly diagnose. Unfortunately, an instance of this invalid construct actually occurs in the Ada compiler sources themselves, which is now detected by the new compiler. Therefore, the above SVN revision also adds a fix to that instance, in file uintp.adb. However, this latter fix was not backported to older compiler versions. Therefore, if you attempt to build a 4.4 Ada compiler today, using a current snapshot (post 2010-06-22) of mainline as the host compiler, build with fail with exactly this error message. The fix should be to simply backport the uintp.adb fix from revision 161147 to the 4.4 tree. As this has nothing to do with Linaro as such, and is required even in the absence of the Linaro patch set, I'd suggest that this be done directly in the Ubuntu compiler. -- [armel] gnat-4.4 built from the linaro toolchain fails to build https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/608125 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 500524] Re: bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression)
Merge request into Linaro GCC 4.4 now pending. -- bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/500524 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Merge requests for both Linaro GCC 4.4 and Linaro GCC 4.5 now pending. ** Branch linked: lp:~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-604874-4.5 -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
** Also affects: gcc-linaro/4.4 Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: gcc-linaro/4.5 Importance: High Assignee: Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) Status: In Progress ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.4 Assignee: (unassigned) => Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) ** Changed in: gcc-linaro/4.4 Status: New => In Progress -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Fix checked in to 4.5 branch as well. -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 595479] Re: Sequel to PR40521 -- -g causes GCC to generate .eh_frame
** Also affects: gcc-4.4 (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Also affects: gcc-4.5 (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- Sequel to PR40521 -- -g causes GCC to generate .eh_frame https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/595479 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604653] Re: sequel to PR40521
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 595479 *** https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/595479 ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 595479 Sequel to PR40521 -- -g causes GCC to generate .eh_frame -- sequel to PR40521 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604653 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Fix approved for GCC mainline and checked in. Will check in to 4.5 branch after 4.5.1 release. Preparing backport to Linaro GCC now. -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 608125] Re: [armel] gnat-4.4 built from the linaro toolchain fails to build
The error message is odd, since at this location the type "Hnum" *is* used. Maybe this is actually a bug in the host Ada compiler used to build this, which appears to come from the gcc-snapshots package. -- [armel] gnat-4.4 built from the linaro toolchain fails to build https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/608125 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 437726] Re: xplc tests failures on ia64, sparc, and armel with gcc-4.4 -O2
The problem is in the operator== and operator!= routines for UUID, in
include/xplc/uuidops.h:
inline int operator==(const UUID& uuid1, const UUID& uuid2) {
return
(&uuid1 == &uuid2) ||
((static_cast(&uuid1.Data1)[0] == static_cast(&uuid2.Data1)[0]) &&
(static_cast(&uuid1.Data1)[1] == static_cast(&uuid2.Data1)[1]) &&
(static_cast(&uuid1.Data1)[2] == static_cast(&uuid2.Data1)[2]) &&
(static_cast(&uuid1.Data1)[3] == static_cast(&uuid2.Data1)[3]));
}
Since UUID (and GUID) is defined like this:
typedef struct _GUID {
u_int32_t Data1;
u_int16_t Data2;
u_int16_t Data3;
u_int8_t Data4[8];
} GUID;
those static_casts above cause the aliasing violation. Note how
uuid1.Data2/3/4 have effective type u_int16_t or u_int8_t, but are
accessed via an lvalue of type u_int32_t ? This causes undefined
behavior.
To avoid this, there are basically two standards-compliant ways I can
see: either, you compare all elements separately, or else you compare
the whole struct via a memcmp. (The latter could in theory cause
spurious failures if there were padding bytes in the structure; but in
practice this does not occur on any system I'm aware of.)
--
xplc tests failures on ia64, sparc, and armel with gcc-4.4 -O2
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/437726
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 608125] Re: [armel] gnat-4.4 built from the linaro toolchain fails to build
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: New => Confirmed -- [armel] gnat-4.4 built from the linaro toolchain fails to build https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/608125 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 497295] Re: [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm)
** Also affects: gcc-linaro/4.4 Importance: Undecided Status: New -- [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497295 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604653] Re: sequel to PR40521
This is a duplicate to 595479, right? -- sequel to PR40521 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604653 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 505829] Re: [PR42748, armel] excess errors in libstdc++ testsuite when built with glibc-2.11
Linaro GCC actually contains a backport of the PR 42748 fix, so this should be fixed now. ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: New => Fix Released -- [PR42748, armel] excess errors in libstdc++ testsuite when built with glibc-2.11 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/505829 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 497295] Re: [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm)
Since this only occurs with pathological source code, my recommendation would be to leave this as won't fix for 4.4; with 4.5 we get the fix from upstream anyway. -- [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497295 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 497295] Re: [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm)
Looks like this has been addressed in 4.5 and later by Bernd Schmidt's patch for PR 41718: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-11/msg00682.html and Michael Matz's subsequent patch for PR 38582: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-12/msg00144.html -- [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497295 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 497295] Re: [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm)
The problem is that cfgexpand.c wants to track "conflicts" between each pair of stack variables in order to decide whether they can share a stack slot or not -- and this test case has 10 variables, which means 5 billion potential conflict pairs. This overflows a size_t value on 32-bit host machines. Now this happens only with -O0 -fstack-protector, because if optimization is on, the 10 variables are eliminated early on (nothing is ever done to them), and if optimization is off, the pass to compute all those conflicts is normally bypassed -- except if stack protection is enabled, in which case all stack variables always need to be tracked. -- [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497295 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 517156] Re: [armel, fixed in 4.5] ICE in find_reloads, at reload.c in thumb mode
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: New => Fix Committed -- [armel, fixed in 4.5] ICE in find_reloads, at reload.c in thumb mode https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/517156 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 497295] Re: [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm)
I'm getting the ICE on this test case even on a *native* x86 build of vanilla GCC 4.4.4 release (only when using -fstack-protector, of course). Native PPC test fails as well (a bit differently). So this does not appear to be specific to either ARM or the Linaro patches. -- [armel] additional testsuite failures with -mthumb (compared to -marm) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/497295 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Opened GCC bugzilla PR c++/45112 to track this now. ** Bug watch added: GCC Bugzilla #45112 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45112 ** Also affects: gcc via http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45112 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 500524] Re: bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression)
I've committed the fix to the upstream 4.4 branch now. Fix will be in 4.4.5 release. -- bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/500524 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Yes, this does indeed look like the root cause. With the following patch I'm getting correct behavior back: --- gcc/cp/decl.c.orig 2010-07-28 19:26:52.0 +0200 +++ gcc/cp/decl.c 2010-07-28 19:28:13.0 +0200 @@ -2068,6 +2068,10 @@ SET_DECL_INIT_PRIORITY (olddecl, DECL_INIT_PRIORITY (newdecl)); DECL_HAS_INIT_PRIORITY_P (olddecl) = 1; } + /* Likewise for DECL_USER_ALIGN and DECL_PACKED. */ + DECL_USER_ALIGN (olddecl) = DECL_USER_ALIGN (newdecl); + if (TREE_CODE (newdecl) == FIELD_DECL) +DECL_PACKED (olddecl) = DECL_PACKED (newdecl); /* The DECL_LANG_SPECIFIC information in OLDDECL will be replaced with that from NEWDECL below. */ -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
The problem is that in cp/decl.c:duplicate_decls, when merging two decls for one variable, the code uses a memcpy to copy all fields in tree_decl_common *except* those in tree_common (which are handled manually). Since the patch moves the user_align and packed_flag bits from tree_decl_common into tree_base (which is part of tree_common), these bits -which used to be copied automatically by the mempy- are now no longer handled automatically and should have been handled manually. No such code was added however. -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Looks like the culprit may be this patch, which also went upstream. I checked upstream GCC, and it seems broken on the test case (on all platforms) as well ... 2009-06-11 Nathan Froyd Backport from upstream: 2009-06-10 Nathan Froyd gcc/ * tree.h (tree_base): Add packed_flag and user_align fields. Decrease size of spare field. (TYPE_USER_ALIGN): Use user_align from tree_base. (DECL_USER_ALIGN): Likewise. (TYPE_PACKED): Use packed_flag from tree_base. (DECL_PACKED): Likewise. (tree_type): Delete packed_flag and user_align fields. Widen precision field. Widen mode field and shuffle fields to align mode on an 8-bit boundary. (tree_decl_common): Delete decl_flag_1 and user_align fields. Renumber decl_flag_* fields. Fix comments. Widen decl_common_unused field. (DECL_HAS_VALUE_EXPR_P): Adjust for renumbering of decl_flag_* fields. (DECL_EXTERNAL): Likewise. (DECL_BIT_FIELD): Likewise. (DECL_NONADDRESSABLE_P): Likewise. (TYPE_DECL_SUPRESS_DEBUG): Likewise. * config/arm/arm-modes.def (XImode): Make it an INT_MODE. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg00763.html -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Linaro GCC shows this same problem not just on ARM, but also on i386. So it seems this may now cause problem elsewhere as well ... -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Hmm ... actually there *is* code in the Mozilla sources to attempt to
ensure proper alignment, in jsstr.cpp:
#ifdef __SUNPRO_CC
#pragma pack(8)
#else
#pragma pack(push, 8)
#endif
JSString JSString::unitStringTable[]
#ifdef __GNUC__
__attribute__ ((aligned (8)))
#endif
= {
U(0x00), U(0x01), U(0x02), U(0x03), U(0x04), U(0x05), U(0x06), U(0x07),
However, the compiler does not respect the attribute.
Minimal test case is:
struct JSString
{
unsigned int mLength;
static JSString unitStringTable[];
};
#pragma pack(push, 8)
JSString JSString::unitStringTable[] __attribute__ ((aligned (8))) = { 1 };
#pragma pack(pop)
Building this with g++ -S results in:
.global _ZN8JSString15unitStringTableE
.data
.align 2
.type _ZN8JSString15unitStringTableE, %object
.size _ZN8JSString15unitStringTableE, 4
_ZN8JSString15unitStringTableE:
.word 1
.align 2 is wrong; this should be .align 3. Vanilla FSF GCC 4.4.4 gets
this correct, so it does look like a Linaro GCC bug after all.
Interestingly enough, the bug only happens with C++ class static
variables; for "normal" global variables, the alignment attribute is
respected correctly. Looking into GCC now ...
--
firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Ok, so the immediate cause of the bug is that a global array is only
4-byte aligned, but the code silently assumes 8-byte alignment.
The problem triggers in jsatom.cpp:js_AtomizeString:
return (JSAtom *) STRING_TO_JSVAL(JSString::unitString(c));
jsapi.h:STRING_TO_JSVAL uses the low 3 bits of the pointer value to
encode the type of the atom. This works only if all pointers passed to
STRING_TO_JSVAL are guaranteed to be 8-byte aligned.
This is usually not a problem if the value is dynamically allocated.
But in this particular instance, JSString::unitString returns the
address of a global variable (jsstrinlines.h):
inline JSString *
JSString::unitString(jschar c)
{
JS_ASSERT(c < UNIT_STRING_LIMIT);
return &unitStringTable[c];
}
The array unitString Table is a static member of the JSString class
(jsstr.h):
static JSString unitStringTable[];
The compiler assumes that the alignment requirement of that static
variable derive from the alignment requirement of the JSString type.
Since this type has only two members, a size_t and a union of two
pointer types, the total alignment requirement on a platform with 32-bit
pointers like ARM is 4 bytes.
As it so happens, in the build of the "js" executable with this compiler
and options, the variable does actually turn out to reside at an address
that is only 4-byte aligned, but not 8-byte aligned:
000cc034 d JSString::unitStringTable
It seems to me that this is not a compiler bug, just something that can
be triggered by random changes in the compiler ...
Interestingly enough, there is code in jsstr.h to ensure 8-byte
alignment for unitStringTable, but only on Solaris:
#ifdef __SUNPRO_CC
#pragma align 8 (__1cIJSStringPunitStringTable_, __1cIJSStringOintStringTable_)
#endif
static JSString unitStringTable[];
static JSString intStringTable[];
static const char *deflatedIntStringTable[];
I guess it looks like a more generic fix for this problem is required.
It would be good to get some feedback from Firefox developers on how
this is supposed to work ...
--
firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 500524] Re: bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression)
Richard Günther agreed to a 4.4 backport. Working on this now. ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: New => In Progress -- bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/500524 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 604874] Re: firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain
Confirmed the build failure and segfault in firefox-3.6.8+build1+nobinonly with 4.4.4-7ubuntu3. I'm looking into this now. ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Assignee: (unassigned) => Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) -- firefox fails to build from source with Linaro toolchain https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/604874 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607635] Re: regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2
Looks like this is already fixed in 4.4.4-7ubuntu3. Closing the Linaro GCC bug as invalid, since the bug was actually in the testsuite-hardening-fortify.diff patch. ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: Confirmed => Invalid ** Changed in: gcc-linaro Assignee: Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) => (unassigned) ** Changed in: gcc-4.4 (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607635 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607635] Re: regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Assignee: (unassigned) => Ulrich Weigand (uweigand) -- regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607635 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 500524] Re: bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression)
I've looked into the history of the underlying problem a bit more and found out: - in 4.3 and earlier, the problem didn't yet exist - in 4.5 and later, the problem is fixed - however, in 4.4, the problem exists as latent wrong-code generation bug I've suggested on the gcc-patches list that it would be a good idea to backport the fix to 4.4. If they agree, we'd get the fix automatically when moving forward to 4.4.5. Otherwise, we have to decide whether to take the backport into Linaro GCC. -- bootstrap failure in stage3 (integer overflow in preprocessor expression) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/500524 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607635] Re: regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: New => Confirmed -- regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607635 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607635] Re: regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2
It seems the hardening patch was merged upstream in its current form, and they fixed the VERIFY macro instead. See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg02690.html for the "patchlet" to the VERIFY macro. -- regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607635 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607659] Re: xlpc fails during test with the Linaro GCC
** Changed in: gcc-linaro Status: Confirmed => Invalid -- xlpc fails during test with the Linaro GCC https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607659 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607804] [NEW] [armel] gpgme1.0 1.2.0-1.2ubuntu1 fails to build in maverick
Public bug reported: checking for GNU Pth... *** longjmp causes uninitialized stack frame ***: ./conftest terminated *FAILED* | Found GNU Pth 2.0.7 under /usr, but | was unable to perform a sanity execution check. This usually | means that the GNU Pth shared library libpth.so is present | but $LD_LIBRARY_PATH is incomplete to execute a Pth test. | In this case either disable this test via --without-pth-test, | or extend $LD_LIBRARY_PATH, or build GNU Pth as a static | library only via its --disable-shared Autoconf option. | We used the following build environment: |CC="gcc" |CFLAGS="-Wall -g -O2 -I/usr/include" |LDFLAGS="-Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -L/usr/lib" |LIBS=" -lpth -ldl -lnsl" | See config.log for possibly more details. make: *** [configure-stamp] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2 ** Affects: gpgme1.0 (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Tags: armel -- [armel] gpgme1.0 1.2.0-1.2ubuntu1 fails to build in maverick https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607804 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607635] Re: regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2
I've reproduced the problem on i386; the error is: /home/uweigand/linaro/gcc-4.4-4.4.4/src/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/objects/char/9661-1.cc: In function 'bool test01()':^M /home/uweigand/linaro/gcc-4.4-4.4.4/src/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/objects/char/9661-1.cc:71: error: invalid operands of types 'bool' and 'FILE*' to binary 'operator&'^M /home/uweigand/linaro/gcc-4.4-4.4.4/src/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/objects/char/9661-1.cc:71: error: in evaluation of 'operator&=(bool, struct FILE*)'^M Line 71 reads: VERIFY( freopen(name, "r", stdin) ); and was introduced in the form by the patch testsuite-hardening- fortify.diff Index: libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/objects/wchar_t/9661-1.cc === --- a/src/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/objects/wchar_t/9661-1.cc (revision +++ b/src/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/objects/wchar_t/9661-1.cc(working @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ bool test01() exit(0); } - freopen(name, "r", stdin); + VERIFY( freopen(name, "r", stdin) ); s1.wait(); wint_t c1 = fgetwc(stdin); Now, the definition of the VERIFY macro is such that in certain cases, its argument is assumed to be of boolean type: #ifdef _GLIBCXX_ASSERT # include # define VERIFY(fn) assert(fn) #else # define VERIFY(fn) test &= (fn) #endif Note that a statement of the form "test &= x" is not valid for "x" of type "FILE *". This specific case is deliberately triggered by the 9661-1.cc test case: // No asserts, avoid leaking the semaphores if a VERIFY fails. #undef _GLIBCXX_ASSERT All pre-existing calls to VERIFY have explicit boolean arguments, so this works fine. However, the new uses of VERIFY introduced by the testsuite-hardening-fortify.diff patch violate this rule. It seems to me this simply ought to be fixed in that patch. -- regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607635 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 607635] Re: regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2
** Changed in: gcc-4.4 (Ubuntu) Status: New => Confirmed -- regressions in linaro test build 4.4.4-7ubuntu1~ppa2 compared to 4.4.4-6ubuntu2 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/607635 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 523959] Re: GDB backtrace does not work correctly for Thumb-2 on armel
I was unable to investigate much in the original reported scenario,
because the libc.so binary is missing from the tarball:
uweig...@beagle:~$ tar tfz t2-bt-testcase.tar.gz
usr/sbin/rsyslogd-
lib/libz.so.1
lib/libpthread.so.0
lib/libdl.so.2
lib/librt.so.1
lib/libgcc_s.so.1
lib/libc.so.6
usr/lib/debug/usr/sbin/rsyslogd
usr/lib/debug/lib/libpthread-2.11.1.so
usr/lib/debug/lib/libdl-2.11.1.so
usr/lib/debug/lib/librt-2.11.1.so
usr/lib/debug/lib/libc-2.11.1.so
Note that lib/libc.so.6, which is just a symbolic link, is there, but
lib/libc-2.11.1.so, which is where the link goes to, is missing.
Nevertheless, I was able to reproduce similar problems when attempting
to backtrace out of interrupted system calls. For example, I've been
using the following example:
#include
int main (void)
{
sleep (1000);
}
Running this in GDB 7.2 and interrupting results in:
uweig...@beagle:~$ ./gdb-7_2-build/gdb/gdb ./a.out
GNU gdb (GDB) 7.1.90.20100709-cvs
Copyright (C) 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type "show copying"
and "show warranty" for details.
This GDB was configured as "armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi".
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it.
There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type "show copying"
and "show warranty" for details.
This GDB was configured as "armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabi".
For bug reporting instructions, please see:
