https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #34 from Eric Gallag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #30 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #29)
> (In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #28)
> > (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #27)
> > > > --- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth ---
>
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #29 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #28)
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #27)
> > > --- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth ---
> Iain suggested that the required changes for supportin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #28 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #27)
> > --- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth ---
> [...]
> > Did you remember to install the patched build before attempting to run the
> > libjava test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #27 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth ---
[...]
> Did you remember to install the patched build before attempting to run the
> libjava test suite? System Integrity Protection on 10.11 wil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #26 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 37100
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37100&action=edit
proposed patch to suppress PR66848 on darwin
The attached proposed patch suppresses PR66848 on darwin until eit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #24)
> > --- Comment #23 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> >> Yes. If you apply the ugly hack from comment 11, you will find that it
> >> fixes
> >> bot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #24 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #23 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
>> Yes. If you apply the ugly hack from comment 11, you will find that it fixes
>> both the boehm-gc test suite regressions as well as th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #23 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Yes. If you apply the ugly hack from comment 11, you will find that it fixes
> both the boehm-gc test suite regressions as well as those in the libjava test
> suite (which are due to the breakage in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #22 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #21)
>
> for both -m32 and -m64. Are they related?
Yes. If you apply the ugly hack from comment 11, you will find that it fixes
both the boehm-gc test suite re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #20 from Jack Howarth ---
Also, the one commonality in all of the boehm-gc regressions on darwin15
(against the Apple Clang 7.0 compiled libunwind.dylib) is instances of...
* thread #1: tid = 0x20dbb8, 0x7fff93f37148 libdyld.dyli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #19 from Jack Howarth ---
This thread...
http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc/2011-April/004472.html
suggests that the boehm-gc is older than I suspected (as it claims gcc's copy
is based on the 6.6 release). As far a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #18 from Jack Howarth ---
The upstream commit...
https://github.com/ivmai/bdwgc/commit/faef04e7cb3741163dfdf65900ef5d2a0530be0f
2011-02-09 Ivan Maidanski
* src/atomic_ops.c (AO_USE_NO_SIGNALS, AO_USE_NANOSLEEP): New
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #17 from Jack Howarth ---
Okay, I have verified on 10.10 that llvm.org clang 3.6 builds a libunwind.dylib
which doesn't show the boehm-gc test suite regressions but when libunwind.dylib
is built with llvm.org clang 3.7, it does. Accor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #16 from Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia
---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #14)
> I finally got around to rebuilding the Apple open source release of
> libunwind-35.3 from 10.10.5 under Xcode 7 on 10.10.5. The results are rather
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #15 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to Jack Howarth from comment #14)
> I finally got around to rebuilding the Apple open source release of
> libunwind-35.3 from 10.10.5 under Xcode 7 on 10.10.5. The results are rather
> interesting a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth ---
I finally got around to rebuilding the Apple open source release of
libunwind-35.3 from 10.10.5 under Xcode 7 on 10.10.5. The results are rather
interesting as the default build is a Debug one compiled at -O0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth ---
(In reply to m...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #12)
> Is this just a partial import from upstream? If so, I think we should just
> check it in and call the issue solved.
No, the patch shown is an ugly hack o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #11 from Jack Howarth ---
Changing...
--- gcc-5.2.0.orig/boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h 2013-12-21
15:42:39.0 -0500
+++ gcc-5.2.0/boehm-gc/include/private/gcconfig.h 2015-10-11
15:41:26.0 -0400
@@ -1041,10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth ---
FYI, the earliest upstream boehm-gc which builds and passes make check on 10.11
under the Apple clang 7.0 compiled system unwinder is gc-7.2alpha6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #9 from Jack Howarth ---
Note that the earliest upstream boehm-gc release which builds and passes make
check on 10.11 is gc-7.2.tar.gz from http://www.hboehm.info/gc/gc_source/.
Diffing the current boehm-gc sources in gcc trunk sugges
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #8 from Jack Howarth ---
Note that radr://21372179 has been closed by Apple as "behaves as expected' so
that they believe the bug lies in the FSF gcc boehm-gc code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 35960
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35960&action=edit
bzip2 compressed log of staticrootstest walk in lldb from main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 35959
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35959&action=edit
bzip2 compressed log of thread_leak_test walk in lldb from main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 35958
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35958&action=edit
bzip2 compressed log of gctest walk in lldb from main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth ---
The gctest hang backtraces as...
# lldb ./gctest
(lldb) target create "./gctest"
Current executable set to './gctest' (x86_64).
(lldb) r
Process 35911 launched: './gctest' (x86_64)
Switched to incremental mod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth ---
The seg fault in staticrootstexst back traces as...
# lldb ./staticrootstest
(lldb) target create "./staticrootstest"
Current executable set to './staticrootstest' (x86_64).
(lldb) r
Process 35905 launched: '
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #2 from Jack Howarth ---
The seg fault in the thread_leak_test back traces as...
# lldb ./thread_leak_test
(lldb) target create "./thread_leak_test"
Current executable set to './thread_leak_test' (x86_64).
(lldb) r
Process 35899 laun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66848
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth ---
Created attachment 35957
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35957&action=edit
x86_64-apple-darwin14 binaries that reproduce regressions on
x86_64-apple-darwin15
34 matches
Mail list logo
