https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
--- Comment #26 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|bkoz at gcc dot
--- Comment #22 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-30 20:23
---
The following two tests also fail on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11:
FAIL: ext/new_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test
FAIL: ext/throw_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-28 18:53 ---
Back, and on darwin as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02455.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02457.html
Please hang on while I work through this.
--
bkoz at gcc dot
--- Comment #15 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-28 18:53 ---
Mine
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #16 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-28 19:59
---
At least, now we are sure the issue was not caused by my tentative fixes to
throw_allocator.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-28 20:09
---
Sorry.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-05-28
20:15 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: ext/throw_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test
At least, now we are sure the issue was not caused by my tentative fixes to
throw_allocator.
My conclusion was that this is a
--- Comment #19 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-28 22:25
---
Let's see what Benjamin eventually figures out: he has a lot of experience with
such nasty ordering issues... ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
--- Comment #20 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-29 01:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=17929)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17929action=view)
reworked version of throw_allocator
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
--- Comment #21 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-29 01:20 ---
Yeah Paolo, didn't these this was due to your rework. I think the test cases
are ok now, seems like a better starting place although we may need to add
// { dg-require-cxa-atexit }
on more of these.
Actually
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-21 09:15
---
So, you should compare it to the previous delete, which normally should be the
*only* one involving basic_string.
To be clear, the expected sequence is the following, as you can check on any
other linux
--- Comment #6 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-22 00:54 ---
The backtrace from the second delete is:
(gdb) bt
#0 operator delete (p=0x8001e530) at deallocate_global.cc:51
#1 0x4000de94 in
__gnu_cxx::new_allocatorstd::_Rb_tree_nodestd::pairvoid* const,
--- Comment #7 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-22 01:07
---
Any idea why this crazy thing is happening only on hpux?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
--- Comment #8 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-22 01:15
---
In any case, what you posted in the last comment looks to me very similar to
the *first* delete on linux, not the *second*. Maybe better if you post all
three deletes, one after the other. Note: without my
--- Comment #9 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-22 01:29 ---
Subject: Bug 40094
Author: paolo
Date: Fri May 22 01:28:50 2009
New Revision: 147788
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=147788
Log:
2009-05-21 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com
PR
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-21 00:49 ---
This is the backtrace for the last delete:
(gdb) bt
#0 operator delete (p=0x8001e4f8) at deallocate_global.cc:51
#1 0x4000eafc in __gnu_cxx::new_allocatorchar::deallocate (
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-17 15:28
---
Any news on this? I'd like to port the throw_allocator changes to 4_4-branch
too, because the allocator is badly broken otherwise.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-05-17
23:20 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: ext/throw_allocator/deallocate_global.cc execution test
Any news on this? I'd like to port the throw_allocator changes to 4_4-branch
too, because the allocator is badly broken
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-05-10 20:17
---
This is seen only on hpux and frankly I have no idea how the recent changes to
throw_allocator (which was completely broken before) could have caused it: I
would suggest taking the testcase out of the
22 matches
Mail list logo
