https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
While this issue seems fixed(?), there's now a new one with the same symptom,
not sure if we should dup and keep this one open?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-13 branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ab8fed849ab345974e5b83472749ac1393878f71
commit r13-7709-gab8fed849ab345974e5b83472749ac1393878f71
Author: Thomas Neumann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c46bded78f3733ad1312d141ebf1ae541032a48b
commit r14-3154-gc46bded78f3733ad1312d141ebf1ae541032a48b
Author: Thomas Neumann
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
[...]
> I'm currently running a full i386-pc-solaris2.11 bootstrap.
... which just completed without
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #8 from Thomas Neumann ---
> Created attachment 55715
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55715=edit
> patch to use the correct base pointer
>
> The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Neumann ---
Created attachment 55715
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55715=edit
patch to use the correct base pointer
The attached patch fixes the test case by using the correct base pointer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Neumann ---
Thanks for the pointer, I could reproduce the problem in a VM now.
That shared library uses an usual table encoding that has to reference the
original base pointer within get_pc_range. But when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #6 from ro at manam dot mail-host-address-is-not-set ---
> --- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth ---
> (In reply to Thomas Neumann from comment #1)
>> The assert says that the code tries to de-register a frame that it did not
>> register
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Neumann ---
The assert itself is old, it was just updated due to code changes. And
asserting there makes sense, if we keep an old frame around we might see a
crash later during unwinding if the unwinder tries to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Thomas Neumann from comment #1)
> The assert says that the code tries to de-register a frame that it did not
> register before or that was deregistered before.
Did we assert for these cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110956
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.3
Summary|gcc_assert is
13 matches
Mail list logo