https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #30 from Rafał Mużyło galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2013-01-06 02:20:08
UTC ---
While 4.7.2 still has the problem, I've just learnt about PR33763.
Now, while that particular patch doesn't help 4.7.2 - even it it sounds like it
should -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #31 from Rafał Mużyło galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2013-01-06 03:34:17
UTC ---
PS: the stripped down test case from PR33763 is quite alike attachment 25239,
yet something makes a difference.
extern void *bar (void);
extern int baz (void);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #29 from Rafał Mużyło galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2012-06-17 13:17:36
UTC ---
gcc 4.7.1 still shows inconsistent behavior with attachment 25239.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
Rafał Mużyło galtgendo at o2 dot pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25238|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #27 from Rafał Mużyło galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2011-09-11 03:40:16
UTC ---
Created attachment 25238
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25238
prepocessed code of possibly related failure in gcc 4.6.1
OK, I'm not sure if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
Dexuan Cui dexuan.cui at intel dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dexuan.cui at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
Ryan Hill dirtyepic at gentoo dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dirtyepic at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #25 from Ryan Hill dirtyepic at gentoo dot org 2011-03-26
08:04:14 UTC ---
-fno-inline-small-functions works with -O2, not -Os.
--- Comment #20 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-04-22 00:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=17669)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17669action=view)
prepocessed source of id.c
People, I've got a result, that's either very funny or very not funny.
With the same
--- Comment #21 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-04-22 00:23 ---
Well, with 4.4.0 id.c compiles correctly in both cases.
Let's check the harder part.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #22 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-04-22 01:08 ---
Well, gcc 4.4.0 works without '-fno-inline-small-functions' for
freeciv too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #23 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-04-22 01:15 ---
comment 22 was of course about '-fno-guess-branch-probability',
not the other one.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #19 from falk at debian dot org 2009-03-16 10:24 ---
(In reply to comment #18)
Well, I've got bad news for you anyway:
it seems that the problem affects gcc-4.3.2 too:
it seems it's reproducible in another app,
however one potentially much harder to debug.
Please read
--- Comment #18 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-07 14:06 ---
Well, I've got bad news for you anyway:
it seems that the problem affects gcc-4.3.2 too:
it seems it's reproducible in another app,
however one potentially much harder to debug.
Please read
--- Comment #16 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-07 04:30 ---
OK, I've done a little test and I'd like to know,
if it's results actually mean anything:
I've compiled freeciv with CFLAGS=-O2 -finline-functions
-fno-guess-branch-probability and it did not crash.
Does the above confirm
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 6, 2009, at 8:30 PM, galtgendo at o2 dot pl gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
--- Comment #16 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-07 04:30
---
OK, I've done a little test and I'd like to know,
if it's results actually mean anything:
I've compiled
--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2009-03-07 04:35 ---
Subject: Re: gcc 4.3.3 miscompiles when -finline-small-functions is used
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 6, 2009, at 8:30 PM, galtgendo at o2 dot pl gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org
wrote:
--- Comment #16 from
--- Comment #11 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 15:15 ---
Changing those two to unsigned doesn't help (I have checked that
even before comment 8). Actually, I changed a few ints to unsigned
wherever it looked sane for this file and it still crashed.
What's more, '-O1' works and
--- Comment #12 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 16:17 ---
OK, a (perhaps) interesting result:
'-fno-guess-branch-probability' works too, but
as first to work was '-fno-inline-small-functions',
this may simply be a case of this option making code
big enough to hit inlining limit.
--- Comment #13 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 16:22 ---
On a not really related note:
output of 'gcc -Q -O1 --help=optimizers' is quite inconsistent
with the manpage. Among others, -finline-small-functions according
to the manpage is turned on for -O1, -Q output claims the
--- Comment #14 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-03-03 17:01
---
Is there a testcase to show run-time error or compile-time error?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #15 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 21:13 ---
It's a runtime error and there's no real testcase,
as, for the time being, it's hard to say what exactly goes wrong.
The only real analysis is in the upstream bug, but it's nothing conclusive
(at least it doesn't seem
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-02 13:52 ---
Does -fno-strict-aliasing help ?
Does -fno-strict-overflow help?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-02 21:56 ---
I'll check, but, as summary suggests (indirectly),
'-O2 -fno-inline-small-functions' works just fine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #4 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-02 22:20 ---
Well, neither helps.
As a sidenote: 'gcc -Q -O2 --help=optimizers' fails to list
'-fstrict-overflow',
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39333
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-02 22:43 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I'll check, but, as summary suggests (indirectly),
'-O2 -fno-inline-small-functions' works just fine.
But that just enables more inlining. The problem is most likely somewhere
else.
--
--- Comment #6 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 00:20 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
But that just enables more inlining. The problem is most likely somewhere
else.
If so, why does '-O2' fail and '-O2 -fno-inline-small-functions' work ?
--
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-03 00:21 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
If so, why does '-O2' fail and '-O2 -fno-inline-small-functions' work ?
Because you just disabled some extra inlining. try -O2
-fno-inline-small-functions -finline-functions and you will
--- Comment #8 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 03:23 ---
OK, we seem to misunderstand each other.
Anyway, as '-Wall -Wpointer-arith
-Wcast-align -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations'
was set for all files during build and there were no warnings,
the problem is probably
--- Comment #9 from galtgendo at o2 dot pl 2009-03-03 03:43 ---
BTW, this is the workaround, that upstream created:
http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/freeciv/trunk/common/aicore/cm.c?rev=15556view=diffr1=15556r2=1p1=trunk/common/aicore/cm.cp2=/trunk/common/aicore/cm.c
--
--- Comment #10 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-03 03:51
---
for (i = 0, j = 0; i lattice-size || forced_loop; i++) {
i is signed and lattice-size is unsigned so there might be some wrapping.
plus if (lattice-size 0) {
will be changed into lattice-size != 0 .
32 matches
Mail list logo
