On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:03:54AM -0700, Christopher Li wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:33:44AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > Segfault is new (which version?); the fscking mess in altivec is not, but
> > it (a) doesn't depend on host sparse is ran on; (b) shouldn't lead to
> > segfaults. Altivec extensions are undocumented and fortunately used only
> > in one place in the tree. You should get sparse errors, but it shouldn't
> > die on those.
>
> I think the segfault is likely to cause by my recent change in the parser.
>
> Dave, can you get a backtrace of the segfault? Even better if you can
> give me a small test case which I can reproduce it on x86.
I did battle with our ppc64 buildhost last night to try and coax it
into giving me a coredump, no luck. And as I don't have gcc in that
chroot, I couldn't build it natively. Given this is altivec stuff,
I didn't try building it on x86. At which point I admitted defeat
and turned in for the night ;)
I'll see if I can force it into something buildable on x86 later,
but first I'll see if I can get a useful shell on that buildhost
that I can run gcc & gdb in.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
