https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8ee6d13e32279faf9ef4fd8eabfba0adfca0dfb9
commit r14-9313-g8ee6d13e32279faf9ef4fd8eabfba0adfca0dfb9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #14 from Lukas Grätz ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 57545 [details]
> gcc14-pr114116.patch
>
> This seems to fix it, so far tested just on the small testcase, back to the
> expected backtrace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #13 from Lukas Grätz ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12)
> (In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #11)
> >
> > I applied it, double checked, make distclean, configure, make again.
> >
> > But your result seems different.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #11)
>
> I applied it, double checked, make distclean, configure, make again.
>
> But your result seems different. Have you applied Jakub Jelinek's patch to
No.
> save
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #11 from Lukas Grätz ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10)
> (In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #9)
>
> >
> > Not on my computer. When I used -g I got:
> >
> >
> > no_return_to_caller:
> > .LFB0:
> > .loc 1 16 1 view
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #9)
>
> Not on my computer. When I used -g I got:
>
>
> no_return_to_caller:
> .LFB0:
> .loc 1 16 1 view -0
> .cfi_startproc
> .loc 1 17 3 view .LVU1
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #9 from Lukas Grätz ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #8)
> (In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #7)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #6)
> > > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> > > > Yeah. Not to mention, one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Lukas Grätz from comment #7)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> > > Yeah. Not to mention, one can call backtrace even if -g0; you just don't
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
Lukas Grätz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lukas.graetz@tu-darmstadt.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|hjl.tools at gmail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Yeah. Not to mention, one can call backtrace even if -g0; you just don't get
nice names for the addresses. Without the patch you get crashes in the
unwinder when doing backtrace.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> > Created attachment 57545 [details]
> > gcc14-pr114116.patch
> >
> > This seems to fix it, so far tested just on the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Created attachment 57545 [details]
> gcc14-pr114116.patch
>
> This seems to fix it, so far tested just on the small testcase, back to the
> expected backtrace there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 57545
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57545=edit
gcc14-pr114116.patch
This seems to fix it, so far tested just on the small testcase, back to the
expected backtrace
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-26
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe introduce TYPE_NO_CALLEE_SAVED_REGISTERS_EXCEPT_BP or something similar?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114116
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
18 matches
Mail list logo
