--- Comment #13 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 11:24 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> A non-sse4 sse2 capable host (core2 class) is needed to trigger valgrind
> failure.
This is actually PR45386. Sorry for the noise...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45484
--- Comment #12 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 06:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=21652)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21652&action=view)
preprocessed source, fails with valgrind on linux
A non-sse4 sse2 capable host (core2 class) is needed to trigger va
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 05:55 ---
Subject: Re: r163660 ICEs gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c
compilation, -Os at -m32
On Sep 1, 2010, at 10:47 PM, "ubizjak at gmail dot com"
wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com
On Sep 1, 2010, at 10:47 PM, "ubizjak at gmail dot com" > wrote:
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 05:47
---
(In reply to comment #8)
Since this doesn't backtrace in gdb, I recompiled dwarf2out.c with
the patch...
You should use bigger hammer.
Try va
--- Comment #10 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-09-02 05:47 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Since this doesn't backtrace in gdb, I recompiled dwarf2out.c with the
> patch...
You should use bigger hammer.
Try valgrind using following procedure:
a) Create a preprocessed source
"~
--- Comment #9 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-02
05:10 ---
Note that in current gcc trunk (r163747) with...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg01916.html
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21650
the frequency of the test case ICEing th
--- Comment #8 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-02
05:05 ---
At r163660, the reduced test case (of just the test3 subroutine of
sprint-chk.c) triggers the compiler ICE at high frequency on
x86-apple-darwin10...
/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/Users/howarth/
--- Comment #7 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-02
04:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=21651)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21651&action=view)
preprocessed source of reduced failing test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #6 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
23:21 ---
I should also note that sometimes the test in comment 5 does produce identical
code between two instances of executing the compile command whereas other times
I get a crash...
/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/
--- Comment #5 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
23:17 ---
The code generate IS random. I repeatedly execute...
/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/Users/howarth/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/Users/howarth/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c
--- Comment #4 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
23:11 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
>
> I think I can prove that my patch doesn't affect code generation, except
> possibly on the SPARC, so I'm a little skeptical about your diagnosis. Are
> you
> sure it's not r1
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-01 20:57
---
> Original patch submitted with
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00440.html.
I think I can prove that my patch doesn't affect code generation, except
possibly on the SPARC, so I'm a little skeptical
--- Comment #2 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
19:26 ---
I am finding in current gcc trunk that these tests randomly pass and fail if
you repeat them enough times. This correlates with Richard Henderson
observation that the failures at r163660 looks like random m
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01
16:21 ---
Original patch submitted with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00440.html.
Test cases added with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-08/msg00503.html.
--
howarth at nitro dot med dot uc d
14 matches
Mail list logo