Launchpad has imported 6 comments from the remote bug at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31804.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2007-05-03T21:10:44+00:00 Rwxr-xr-x wrote: $ perl -wle 'print "int", "*" x 999999, "p;"' >try.c && gcc try.c gcc: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1) ... $ gcc -v Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-4.1.1-r3/work/gcc-4.1.1/configure --prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.1.1 --includedir=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/include --datadir=/usr/share/gcc-data/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1 --mandir=/usr/share/gcc-data/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/man --infodir=/usr/share/gcc-data/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/info --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/include/g++-v4 --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --disable-altivec --enable-nls --without-included-gettext --with-system-zlib --disable-checking --disable-werror --enable-secureplt --disable-libunwind-exceptions --disable-multilib --disable-libmudflap --disable-libssp --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-languages=c,c++,java,fortran --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-clocale=gnu Thread model: posix gcc version 4.1.1 (Gentoo 4.1.1-r3) gcc-4.3-20070427 seems to have the same problem. 3.4.6 works fine, but after increasing the number of *'s to 99999999 it says: cc1: out of memory allocating 1677721600 bytes after a total of 845819904 bytes So this problem seems to be new in gcc4. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/172326/comments/0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2007-05-03T22:02:50+00:00 Rguenth wrote: you must be kidding. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/172326/comments/1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2007-05-04T03:40:57+00:00 Fang-a wrote: adding to personal favorite list :) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/172326/comments/2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2007-05-04T04:50:41+00:00 Bangerth wrote: (In reply to comment #0) > $ perl -wle 'print "int", "*" x 999999, "p;"' >try.c && gcc try.c > gcc: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1) Yo, dude, that would take a seriously long program to even initialize that pointer :-) But seriously, while I do think that we should strive to compile even programs that are "weird" or "unusual" in their requirements on the compiler, I think that this one goes a little overboard. I would, however, be interested to hear how many levels of pointers gcc actually *can* compile. I would imagine it's at least a few hundred, maybe thousand. Maybe you could try to figure out? Best Wolfgang Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/172326/comments/3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2007-05-04T12:00:27+00:00 Joseph-codesourcery wrote: Subject: Re: gcc segfaults on very long pointer chains On Fri, 4 May 2007, bangerth at dealii dot org wrote: > But seriously, while I do think that we should strive to compile even > programs that are "weird" or "unusual" in their requirements on the > compiler, I think that this one goes a little overboard. I would, > however, be interested to hear how many levels of pointers gcc > actually *can* compile. I would imagine it's at least a few > hundred, maybe thousand. Maybe you could try to figure out? That would depend on your stack limit (so the question would really be, for each extra MB of stack limit how many more levels can it compile)? For such extreme programs I think it's reasonable to expect users to increase their stack limit when running the compiler. Although in this case, it would be reasonably straightforward to make c_parser_declarator iterative (with an internal linked list on the parser obstack) rather than recursive - if that were actually of use in compiling real code with real stack limits. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/172326/comments/4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2007-12-15T20:46:05+00:00 Pinskia wrote: *** Bug 34308 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/172326/comments/11 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/172326 Title: Reproducable SIGSEGV (char ************* etc.) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/172326/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
