On 18-01-2018 19:53, Tom Lane wrote:
Marina Polyakova <m.polyak...@postgrespro.ru> writes:
On 18-01-2018 17:56, Tom Lane wrote:
Weird. Maybe the gcc bug only manifests with certain optimization
flags? That's not what I'd have expected from Victor's theory about
why the code is wrong, but if it only shows up some of the time,
it's hard to think of another explanation.
Thank you! Using ./configure CC="gcc" CFLAGS="-m64 -O1" on commit
9c7d06d60680 with your patch, I got this:
[ configure check passes ]
But make check got the same failures, and I see the same debug output
as
in [1]..
Interesting. Maybe the parameter-passing misbehavior that Victor's
test is looking for isn't the only associated bug.
P.S. As I understand it, this comment on bugzilla [2] is also about
this.
[2] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83925#c6
Even more interesting, see c7 that was just posted there:
Eric Botcazou 2018-01-18 16:22:48 UTC
128-bit types requite 128-bit alignment on SPARC64 so we cannot
support that.
So basically, we're outta luck and we have to consider __int128 as
unsupportable on SPARC. I'm inclined to mechanize that as a test on
$host_cpu. At least that means we don't need an AC_RUN test ;-)
%-)) :-)
Can I do something else about this problem?..
--
Marina Polyakova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
