https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|wrong-code |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #17 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed May 18 16:00:43 2016
New Revision: 236412
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236412&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/71161
* elf.c (phdr_callback) [__i386__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #16 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed May 18 15:45:08 2016
New Revision: 236404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236404&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/71161
* elf.c (phdr_callback) [__i386__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #15 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed May 18 14:48:40 2016
New Revision: 236398
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236398&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/71161
* elf.c (phdr_callback) [__i386__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #14 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed May 18 14:40:54 2016
New Revision: 236397
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236397&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/71161
* elf.c (phdr_callback) [__i386__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 18 May 2016, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
>
> --- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
I don't see anything wrong btw. the following contains all esp modifications
and indirect calls.
00115d40 :
115d40: 55 push %ebp
115d41: 89 e5 mov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #11 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Thanks for tracking it down! I'm putting this workaround in my tree for the
> next testing. I've briefly looked into the dl_iterate_phdr history but
> can't fi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schwab at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #9 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Following patch solves all failures:
--cut here--
diff --git a/libbacktrace/elf.c b/libbacktrace/elf.c
index f85ac65..81ba344 100644
--- a/libbacktrace/elf.c
+++ b/libbacktrace/elf.c
@@ -866,6 +866,9 @@ struct
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #8 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Old glibc misaligns the stack on 32bit targets.
In my case (Centos 5.11, glibc 2.5), looking into:
FAIL: go.go-torture/execute/array-1.go execution, -O0
Starting program: /home/uros/test/a.out
[Thread deb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #7 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
> Well, the fact that libgo has a lot of execute fails doesn't point to
> libsanitizer. Maybe to split-stack support, who knows.
>
> What is special about r23
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 17 May 2016, ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
>
> --- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich --- So
> do all of r236090 related failures a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #5 from Ilya Enkovich ---
So do all of r236090 related failures are reproducible with glibc 2.11.3 only?
IIUC the problem most probably hides in sanitizer runtime libraries and you
can't make preprocessed testcase reproducible with o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 38506
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38506&action=edit
testresults
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Updating to r236315, the fix for PR71114 doesn't fix it. I'm going to attach
testresults after all testing finished.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Probably dup of PR 71114. Does the patch in comment PR 71114#c13 work for you?
It should be PR 71114#c15 (PR 71114#c13 is broken).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Probably dup of PR 71114. Does the patch in comment PR 71114#c13 work for you?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71161
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
19 matches
Mail list logo
