--- Comment #21 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-16 17:01
---
Subject: Bug 44464
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Jun 16 17:01:06 2010
New Revision: 160852
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160852
Log:
2010-06-15 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
PR
--- Comment #22 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-16 17:02
---
This is now fixed on both the trunk and the 4.5 branch.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-15 11:09
---
Subject: Bug 44464
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Jun 15 11:09:12 2010
New Revision: 160777
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=160777
Log:
2010-06-15 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
PR
--- Comment #18 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-11 16:49
---
When I tried the LTO step in any of the two testcases I got:
jamb...@tuc:~/gcc/mine/test/pr44464$ ~/gcc/inst/mine/bin/gcc -r -fwhopr
igmp.mini.o
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc_s
collect2: ld returned 1 exit
--- Comment #19 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-11 17:09
---
Sorry you need -nostdlib too (forgot that)
-r is immediate linking
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--- Comment #16 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-10 13:20
---
I reduced another of my ICEs from this build and it's in the same place.
(gdb) bt
#0 var_map_base_init (map=0x10abe60) at ../../gcc/gcc/tree-ssa-live.c:87
#1 0x007248fb in coalesce_ssa_name () at
--- Comment #17 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-10 13:21
---
Created an attachment (id=20882)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20882action=view)
other test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--- Comment #4 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 10:55 ---
I was told that the whopr link step would inherit the optimization
flags from the build step. Is that not true?
Here's a reduced test case with only a single input file (reduced too)
gcc46 -O2 -fwhopr -c
--- Comment #5 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 10:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=20875)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20875action=view)
reduced input file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--
andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 12:08 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I was told that the whopr link step would inherit the optimization
flags from the build step. Is that not true?
That's not true.
Here's a reduced test case with only a single input file
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 12:15 ---
Actually - we seem to get IPA SRA parm repacements done but the original
parameter SSA names are not released.
(gdb) call debug_function (cfun-decl, 0)
igmp_mc_get_next (unnamed type * ISRA.14, struct ip_mc_list *
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 12:16 ---
CC'ing martin even.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 12:16 ---
Unfortunate. Fixing that in the makefiles would be major effort for all the -f
and -m flags, which sometimes vary by target.
I thought LTO was designed to minimize makefile changes?
--
--- Comment #10 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 12:18
---
The tree input that leads to the NULL annotation is a error_mark
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 13:01
---
(In reply to comment #10)
The tree input that leads to the NULL annotation is a error_mark
Not for me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-09 13:03
---
(In reply to comment #9)
Unfortunate. Fixing that in the makefiles would be major effort for all the
-f
and -m flags, which sometimes vary by target.
I thought LTO was designed to minimize makefile
--- Comment #13 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 13:35
---
What happens then when some files need different options that other files?
This sounds more and more like a showstopper if you're right.
I was not prepared to redesign the Makefiles
--
--- Comment #14 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 13:42
---
I found this code in lto.c which seems to disagree:
/* Read the options saved from each file in the command line. Called
from lang_hooks.post_options which is called by process_options
right before all the
--- Comment #15 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-09 13:55
---
Ok seems it does not do what I want:
FIXME lto. Currently the scheme is limited in that only the
options saved on the first object file (f1.o) are read back during
the link step. This means that the
--- Comment #1 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-08 09:38 ---
Ok unable to attach and I've been told reporting LTO bugs requires some magic
voodoo incarnations first.
If it helps here's the gdb information of the crash:
(gdb) pt var
error_mark 0x1200022
(gdb) bt
#0
--- Comment #2 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2010-06-08 09:40 ---
The object files are at http://halobates.de/whopr-ice.tar.bz2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44464
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-08 09:55 ---
Did you reduce the number of object files already? Note that you are linking
without optimization (and you probably built the .o files with optimization?)
So this might be a duplicate of PR41159.
Can you put
23 matches
Mail list logo
