http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57074
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2013-05-02 14:01:59
UTC ---
So the section anchor code places vars (and constants) in blocks according to
their alignment and sizes (varasm.c:place_block_symbol). The calculations
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57074
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57134
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57052
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57052
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57052
Bug #: 57052
Summary: missed optimization with rotate and mask
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55431
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-15 13:53:47
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Fri Feb 15 13:53:40 2013
New Revision: 196077
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=196077
Log:
PR target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55431
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55431
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55431
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2013-02-12 13:23:59
UTC ---
On thinking about this a little more, the idea of using /proc/self/auxv isn't
that good. MD_FALLBACK_FRAME_STATE_FOR is only needed for older kernels
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55431
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55431
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2013-02-12 03:04:28
UTC ---
Created attachment 29420
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29420
use /proc/self/auxv
At the time the original code was being developed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45053
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45053
--- Comment #13 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2013-02-07 08:40:15
UTC ---
Created attachment 29382
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29382
Fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2013-02-06 13:04:43
UTC ---
Regressed due to pr54131 fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2013-02-06 13:31:45
UTC ---
This one is hardly an annoying bug. You need
a) nested functions,
b) using floating point,
c) with an unusual set of callee saved fprs,
d) and -Os.
I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-07 01:39:29
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Feb 7 01:39:21 2013
New Revision: 195834
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195834
Log:
PR target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44364
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54131
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-07 02:27:06
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Feb 7 02:26:53 2013
New Revision: 195835
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195835
Log:
PR target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-07 02:37:49
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Feb 7 02:37:37 2013
New Revision: 195836
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195836
Log:
gcc/
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51376
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-05 13:40:35
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Feb 5 13:40:25 2013
New Revision: 195756
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195756
Log:
PR libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-05 13:40:39
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Feb 5 13:40:25 2013
New Revision: 195756
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195756
Log:
PR libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-06 02:46:24
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed Feb 6 02:46:13 2013
New Revision: 195778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195778
Log:
PR target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56159
Bug #: 56159
Summary: config/linux/ptrlock.c lacks acquire barrier
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56159
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-24 21:52:04
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Jan 24 21:51:58 2013
New Revision: 195444
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195444
Log:
PR libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51376
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-24 21:52:03
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Jan 24 21:51:58 2013
New Revision: 195444
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195444
Log:
PR libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
Bug #: 56073
Summary: SPEComp2012 376.kdtree fails to complete
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51376
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-22 11:41:56
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Jan 22 11:41:53 2013
New Revision: 195370
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195370
Log:
PR libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-22 11:41:57
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Jan 22 11:41:53 2013
New Revision: 195370
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195370
Log:
PR libgomp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56073
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #36 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-11-02 02:13:20
UTC ---
The change I mention in #c22
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=184110
tests for atomic ops on all of bool, short, int and long long, where
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #38 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-11-02 02:39:29
UTC ---
Ah, the #c3 fail on powerpc was due to a powerpc glibc pthread_once bug. And
comment #36 should have read:
..previous test was for *either* atomic bool
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27619
--- Comment #17 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-10-26 03:51:35
UTC ---
Fixed in gas and ld. I think the only thing that needs doing in gcc is fixing
the lwa constraint.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27619
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54131
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-31 22:14:51
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Jul 31 22:14:44 2012
New Revision: 190022
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190022
Log:
PR target/54131
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54131
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54131
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54093
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-28 00:04:15
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Sat Jul 28 00:04:10 2012
New Revision: 189921
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189921
Log:
PR target/54093
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54093
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54110
Bug #: 54110
Summary: lower-subreg related code quality for long long
function return
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54093
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-07-26 13:16:23
UTC ---
Created attachment 27877
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27877
proposed fix
Please try out this patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54093
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53914
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53914
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-07-24 12:53:35
UTC ---
No, I was mistaken. The pr42427 patch isn't at fault here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53914
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-24 05:55:56
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Jul 24 05:55:50 2012
New Revision: 189801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189801
Log:
PR target/53914
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-24 05:55:56
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Jul 24 05:55:50 2012
New Revision: 189801
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189801
Log:
PR target/53914
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54063
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
Bug #: 54009
Summary: incorrect code generated for DFmode lo_sum mem
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54009
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53914
Bug #: 53914
Summary: poor code generated for offset addressing on ppc32
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53914
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53914
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53803
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53803
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-06-29 16:03:07
UTC ---
Closed as invalid on the assumption that this is really a uclibc build bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-05-17 12:25:03
UTC ---
Here's the problem. Compiled with -m64 -O2, this
int f (long val)
{
int i;
if (val 0)
i = -1;
else
for (i = 0; i 64; i++)
if ((val = 1) 0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53385
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |tree-optimization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53271
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-09 08:17:24
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Wed May 9 08:17:09 2012
New Revision: 187316
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187316
Log:
PR target/53271
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53271
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53271
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-05-08 06:43:15
UTC ---
Created attachment 27340
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27340
proposed patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53271
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01 04:03:25
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue May 1 04:03:21 2012
New Revision: 187010
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187010
Log:
PR target/53038
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53087
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bonzini at gnu dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53087
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-25 05:26:28
UTC ---
Some more data points. The testcase in #1 produces
gcc-4.3.6
cmpldi 7,3,27
mr 9,3
li 3,0
bgtlr 7
lis 0,0xcf8
ori 0,0,63
srd 0,0,9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #33 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-21 13:28:59
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Sat Apr 21 13:28:53 2012
New Revision: 186651
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186651
Log:
PR libstdc++/52839
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #32 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-21 13:27:51
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Sat Apr 21 13:27:44 2012
New Revision: 186650
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186650
Log:
PR libstdc++/52839
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-20 09:33:23
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Fri Apr 20 09:33:19 2012
New Revision: 186616
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186616
Log:
PR target/53040
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
Bug #: 53038
Summary: cfi_restore for cr before cr is actually restored
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
Bug #: 53040
Summary: nested functions may trash floating point registers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-19 15:24:30
UTC ---
Created attachment 27191
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27191
obvious fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-19 15:27:47
UTC ---
testing a fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53040
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #31 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-14 13:24:48
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Sat Apr 14 13:24:43 2012
New Revision: 186453
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186453
Log:
PR libstdc++/52839
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.7.0
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52828
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-12 22:26:28
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Thu Apr 12 22:26:24 2012
New Revision: 186397
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186397
Log:
PR target/52828
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #19 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-10 15:13:24
UTC ---
I think I was on the right track when I questioned whether the problem might be
mixing atomics and mutex protected ops, but was looking in the wrong place. I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.7.1 |---
--- Comment #22
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #15 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-05 08:06:30
UTC ---
Many hours later one of my 32-bit tests failed, but I'm relieved to say it was
only the pthread_once bug.
#0 0x0fbd839c in raise () from /lib/power7/libc.so.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #17 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-05 12:05:01
UTC ---
I spent quite a bit of time today looking at libpthread and can't spot a
problem in pthread_mutex_lock and pthread_mutex_unlock.
I wonder if the problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-04 09:57:51
UTC ---
I also see the same 64-bit failure on r186130. A lot harder to reproduce than
the 32-bit one I originally reported (which is still there on r186130). Likely
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #9 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-04 11:12:56
UTC ---
Heh. We're even. I didn't notice yours was a 64-bit failure until you told me
your gcc revision number.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #10 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-04 14:20:57
UTC ---
I caught the 64-bit failure in the act. It's dying on the gcc_assert in
unwind-dw2.c:_Unwind_SetSpColumn, with the value read from
dwarf_reg_size_table[1] being
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #12 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-04 22:27:43
UTC ---
glibc/ntpl/pthread_once.c:
static int once_lock = LLL_LOCK_INITIALIZER;
int
__pthread_once (once_control, init_routine)
pthread_once_t *once_control
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #13 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-04 23:02:34
UTC ---
Huh, so glibc has a powerpc specific pthread_once, and that one has a different
bug. Lack of lwsync before atomic_increment (once_control);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #14 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-05 04:00:07
UTC ---
Created attachment 27094
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27094
config patch
Yes, the 32-bit failure seems to be gone if we use the gcc builtin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52839
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2012-04-04 01:11:47
UTC ---
Interesting. gcc revision? I've held back on svn update after hearing that
richi had broken the tree for powerpc. The uncaught exception might be an
eh_frame
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=necessary_paths ./default_weaktoshared.exe; do true done
*** glibc detected *** ./default_weaktoshared.exe: double free or corruption
(fasttop): 0x100222e8 ***
=== Backtrace: =
/lib/power7/libc.so.6(+0x833b8)[0xfc333b8]
/lib/power7/libc.so.6(cfree+0x94)[0xfc38b24]
/home/amodra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52828
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
801 - 900 of 1594 matches
Mail list logo
