Hi Thomas:
I will try that commit soon, maybe tonight EST.
In the meantime, I have uncovered a few more parameters of the problem.
Now tried it on a BeagleBone (TI OMAP Arm processor) instead of a Raspberry
Pi.
root@beaglebone:/var/log/tinycc# uname -a
Linux beaglebone 3.2.5+ #1 Mon Feb 13 19:22:44 CET 2012 armv7l GNU/Linux
No Segmentation Faults so far, unlike the Pi, where tests under #40 would
fail intermittently, perhaps every 3 to 5 times.
Still getting the problem with stdio, however. EOF is never detected
apparently. So I rewrote a version of the 40_stdio.c test as follows:
<snip>
fprintf ( stderr, "Staring fgetc test..." ) ;
char InChar;
char ShowChar;
f = fopen("fred.txt", "r");
InChar = fgetc ( f ) ;
while ( ! feof ( f ) )
{
ShowChar = InChar;
if (ShowChar < ' ')
ShowChar = '.';
printf("ch: %d '%c'\n", InChar, ShowChar);
InChar = fgetc ( f ) ;
}
fclose(f);
fprintf ( stderr, "fgetc test done\n" ) ;
<snip>
In other words, I replaced the original test like:
while ( InChar = fgetc ( f ) != EOF )
with:
InChar = fgetc ( f ) ;
while ( ! feof ( f ) )
and doing this for both getc and fgetc loops enables the test to pass,
along wth all subsequent tests up through 55. There is a failure after
that, but it looks like this:
gcc -o libtcc_test libtcc_test.c ../libtcc.a -I. -I/var/log/tinycc -Wall -g
-O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-sign-compare
-DTCC_TARGET_ARM -DWITHOUT_LIBTCC -DTCC_ARM_EABI -DTCC_ARM_VFP -lm -ldl
------------ libtest ------------
./libtcc_test lib_path=..
Hello World!
fib(32) = 2178309
add(32, 64) = 96
cp ../include/tcclib.h .
gcc -o tcctest.gcc tcctest.c -I. -I. -I/var/log/tinycc -w -Wall -g -O2
-fno-strict-aliasing -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-sign-compare -DTCC_TARGET_ARM
-DWITHOUT_LIBTCC -DTCC_ARM_EABI -DTCC_ARM_VFP -std=gnu99 -O0
-fno-omit-frame-pointer
./tcctest.gcc > test.ref
/bin/sh: line 1: 7477 Segmentation fault ./tcctest.gcc > test.ref
make[1]: *** [test.ref] Error 139
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/log/tinycc/tests'
make: *** [test] Error 2
which is obviously much farther along (benchmark vs. gcc?)
Hope this helps. I will try the commit you suggest. Thanks.
Jerry
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Thomas Preud'homme <[email protected]>wrote:
> Le lundi 21 janvier 2013 03:53:04, Jerry Reed a écrit :
> >
> > Any further suggestions for how I might obtain more information here.
>
> Can you try from a checkout of the tree as of commit
> bfb00494eb2ffaf4fbf68a8ecabe9e503f4cdf65 ?
>
> The change to introduce hardfloat calling convention also changed a bit the
> softfloat calling convention (I tried to factorize the code). I want to
> make
> sure wether it is the cause of this bug or not.
>
> >
> > Again, thanks.
>
> Thanks for the report.
>
--
Interested in bats? Check out my blog at: http://www.karaokebats.com/
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
