--- Comment #19 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-12 18:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=11654)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11654action=view)
C test case
Here's a C test case (from the Linux kernel).
5289:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] /usr/local/bin/gcc -c -O2 --param
--- Comment #20 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-12 20:18 ---
Finally, a *small* test case.
5336:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/tmp/delta/bin] /usr/local/bin/gcc -c -O1 --param
ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0 mini.c
mini.c:27: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please
--- Comment #18 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-11 08:36 ---
A pre-processed C test case would be nice.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--- Comment #17 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-08 13:54 ---
This segfault also shows up when compiling the Linux kernel (compiling file
net/tipc/net.c).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 06:00
---
Wait in tree-inline.c, we do:
/* Update callgraph if needed. */
cgraph_remove_node (cg_edge-callee);
Isn't that wrong as we could inline the callee a couple of times?
Don't we want to do:
/* Update
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 06:37
---
Nothing I have tried so far has worked and I don't understand how we could
remove a node from here.
Oh, I see remove node is correct, we duplicate the nodes which I did not know
about until now.
--
--- Comment #14 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2006-06-07 12:18 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] segfault in ipa-inline.c, if
(e-callee-local.disregard_inline_limits
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 06:00
---
Wait in tree-inline.c, we do:
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 14:54
---
Note the problem is possibly at least latent on the 4.1 branch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--- Comment #16 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-07 16:12 ---
I just got this segfault with when compiling another application. Should I
attach the preprocessed source to this PR or do you have enough information
already to fix it?
--
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 05:19 ---
Created an attachment (id=11620)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11620action=view)
shorest testcase I can reduce to
This is the shorest testcase I could reduce this to, I did it on powerpc-darwin
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 05:30
---
The last time I ran into this was back in 2005, and I had committed the
following patch:
2005-08-29 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR middle-end/23408
* ipa-inline.c
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 05:50
---
The dtor for Refstd::vectorRefNode, std::allocatorRefNodeis the
node which has been freed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-05 19:45 ---
A regression hunt on powerpc-linux using the less-reduced test case with the
options -O2 --param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0 identified
this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=112753
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-06 05:38 ---
I am going to reduce this further.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-03 10:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=11587)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11587action=view)
test case
test case... still fairly large but I've been running delta for 24 hours now
--
--- Comment #2 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-03 10:19 ---
Janis, do you think you can do a regression hunt on this bug?
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-03 20:36 ---
Works for me with r114332 on i686.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-03 20:47 ---
I was using revision 114238. Do you know if there has been a change that might
have fixed this?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de 2006-06-03 20:52 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 regression] segfault in
ipa-inline.c, if (e-callee-local.disregard_inline_limits
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, tbm at cyrius dot com wrote:
I was using revision 114238. Do you know if there has been a change
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-03 21:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=11591)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11591action=view)
less reduced test case
This (less reduced) test case still shows the segfault with current SVN. It
takes fairly long
22 matches
Mail list logo