[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2010.10.06 14:51:02 Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #22 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-06 14:51:02 UTC --- Investigating.
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-01 17:24:27 UTC --- Hmm, I tried to use one of compile farm sparc machines, but no luck. Either with ssh on them I end on gcc12 that is amd64 or they are down. I am looking into the dumps if I can make sense of it, so far I don't seem to be able to find the code taking address of local label in .optimized dump at all. We might be missing some code in inliner that passes the fact that the label is user label...
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #19 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-01 17:35:47 UTC --- Hmm, I tried to use one of compile farm sparc machines, but no luck. Either with ssh on them I end on gcc12 that is amd64 or they are down. Try grobluk (ssh -p 9202 lo...@gcc12.fsffrance.org), it's a 6x machine. Ada compilers are available in /opt/cfarm/release. I am looking into the dumps if I can make sense of it, so far I don't seem to be able to find the code taking address of local label in .optimized dump at all. We might be missing some code in inliner that passes the fact that the label is user label... I'll look into this next week.
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #20 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-10-01 18:34:45 UTC --- --- Comment #18 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-01 17:24:27 UTC --- Hmm, I tried to use one of compile farm sparc machines, but no luck. Either with ssh on them I end on gcc12 that is amd64 or they are down. I am looking into the dumps if I can make sense of it, so far I don't seem to be able to find the code taking address of local label in .optimized dump at all. I had trouble too. I kept all the dumps just in case we needed something earlier. Dave
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #21 from hainque at adacore dot com hainque at adacore dot com 2010-10-01 22:11:52 UTC --- hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: We might be missing some code in inliner that passes the fact that the label is user label... I don't yet have a clear track here, but can provide a pretty easy way to reproduce with a cross and get starters for further analysis: $ configure --target=sparc-sun-solaris2.10 --enable-languages=c,ada --disable-libada --disable-bootstrap $ make CFLAGS=-O0 -g ... let it fail when it gets to C parts of runtime libraries. you should have gnat1 at this stage. then ... $ cd gcc $ make -C ada ../stamp-gnatlib1-rts this prepares the runtime library source symlinks in ada/rts. now: $ ./gnat1 -Iada/rts ada/rts/g-debpoo.adb -O2 -fdump-tree-all -da the anomaly is visible in the output, in particular in one call to debug_pools__put_line from the code for 'Dereference' gnat__debug_pools__dereference__2: ... ld [%g1+%lo(gnat__debug_pools__code_address_for_dereference_end)], %o4 ... sethi %hi(.LL544), %o3 ... callgnat__debug_pools__put_line, 0 or %o3, %lo(.LL544), %o3 LL544 is nowhere for me. From a quick glance, this one of the calls to Put_Line in Dereference_Label if not Valid then if Pool.Raise_Exceptions then raise Accessing_Not_Allocated_Storage; else Put (Output_File (Pool), error: Accessing not allocated storage, at ); Put_Line (Output_File (Pool), Pool.Stack_Trace_Depth, null, Dereference_Label'Address, Code_Address_For_Dereference_End); end if; else Header := Header_Of (Storage_Address); if Header.Block_Size 0 then if Pool.Raise_Exceptions then raise Accessing_Deallocated_Storage; else Put (Output_File (Pool), error: Accessing deallocated storage, at ); Put_Line (Output_File (Pool), Pool.Stack_Trace_Depth, null, Dereference_Label'Address, Code_Address_For_Dereference_End); which indeed passe the address of the Dereference_Label code label. Compiling -da then grep suggests that the label disappears as of ada/rts/g-debpoo.adb.153r.vregs: (code_label/s 12 11 13 4 538 (dereference_label) [4 uses]) ada/rts/g-debpoo.adb.154r.into_cfglayout: (note/s 12 11 14 2 (dereference_label) NOTE_INSN_DELETED_LABEL 538) This is still very rough and obviously needs further investigation, but yields starters.
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #17 from hainque at adacore dot com hainque at adacore dot com 2010-09-30 09:23:25 UTC --- ro at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: Eric, Olivier, could you please have a look at Jan's question in Comment #6? This bug currently breaks Ada bootstrap on Solaris 2/SPARC and hampers my Solaris testing. I'll see if I can get at something with a cross (faster to build), but please don't give up other tracks as I have very limited bandwidth for this right now. Olivier
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-09-30 01:18:27 UTC --- On Tue, 28 Sep 2010, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote: Hi, I would really apprechiate the answer to comment #6. Since the patch should only introduce more (valid) inlining this must be latent bug somewhere Attached .optimized and .nothrow from hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11. It appears to me that the call is attempting to pass a code location. Dave
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #15 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-09-30 01:26:27 UTC --- On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca wrote: For reference, I have also attached the hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 .s file. The problem is the reference to L$0371 in this insn: ldo L$0371-L$0375(%r1),%r1 Dave
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-09-28 12:07:54 UTC --- Hi, I would really apprechiate the answer to comment #6. Since the patch should only introduce more (valid) inlining this must be latent bug somewhere Honza
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hainque at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-28 12:11:35 UTC --- Eric, Olivier, could you please have a look at Jan's question in Comment #6? This bug currently breaks Ada bootstrap on Solaris 2/SPARC and hampers my Solaris testing. Thanks, Rainer
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-28 12:34:28 UTC --- Eric, Olivier, could you please have a look at Jan's question in Comment #6? This bug currently breaks Ada bootstrap on Solaris 2/SPARC and hampers my Solaris testing. Sorry, I won't really have time to look into this before a couple of weeks. The GCC Compile Farm has several SPARC/Linux boxes with pre-built Ada compilers.
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2010-09-28 15:32:01 UTC --- Hi, I would really apprechiate the answer to comment #6. Since the patch should only introduce more (valid) inlining this must be latent bug somewhere In the hppa-hpux case, the label would have had to be a code label. The linker and dynamic loader don't support label differences between code and data symbols. This suggests that the change exposed an inlining bug that removed the symbol. I'll take a look on my next build. Dave
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612 --- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-09-27 17:48:14 UTC --- Jan, again, no progress at all for 2 1/2 weeks on a bootstrap failure on a primary platform. Please fix or revert. Rainer
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
--- Comment #7 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-09-17 08:55 --- Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC --- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-16 20:57 --- This is really strange case. The patch should at most introduce extra inlining that naturally should not introduce undefined symbols. It is used as: sethi %hi(_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_-(.LL363-.)), %o3 or %o3, %lo(_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_-(.LL363-.)), %o3 callgnat__debug_pools__put_line, 0 so it is passed to gnat__debug_pools__put_line. Any idea what should be there? It does not seem like variable, rather like code label. Can I have Unfortunately not; you'd have to ask one of the Ada maintainers. Eric is on the Cc:, he might know. -fdump-tree-optimized (or perhaps better -fdump-tree-all) dumps? Sure. I couldn't attach it to the PR (1.8 MB even compressed with bzip2), so I've put it at http://www.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de/~ro/files/g-debpoo-dump-tree-all.tar.bz2 Thanks. Rainer -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
--- Comment #5 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-12 13:06 --- *** Bug 45639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||danglin at gcc dot gnu dot ||org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-09-10 15:15 --- Subject: Re: [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC A reghunt identified that the regression was caused by this patch: 2010-09-07 Jan Hubicka j...@suse.cz * tree-inline.c (tree_inlinable_function_p): Do not test DECL_REPLACEABL E_P. * ipa-inline.c (cgraph_default_inline_p, update_caller_keys, update_call ee_keys, cgraph_decide_inlining): Test function availability. * cif-code.def (OVERWRITABLE): New code. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada on Solaris 2/SPARC
--- Comment #4 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-10 15:19 --- Jan, could you please have a look. -- ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot ||org Summary|[4.6 regression] Reference |[4.6 regression] Reference |to undefined label building |to undefined label building |libada no Solaris 2/SPARC |libada on Solaris 2/SPARC http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-09 10:29 --- Created an attachment (id=21749) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21749action=view) assembler output -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
[Bug bootstrap/45612] [4.6 regression] Reference to undefined label building libada no Solaris 2/SPARC
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-09 11:09 --- This compiled fine on 20100907 for me. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45612
