Launchpad has imported 26 comments from the remote bug at https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43556.
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://documentation.ubuntu.com/launchpad/user/reference/bugs/multi-project-bugs/about-multi-project-bugs/#bugs-in-external-trackers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T17:09:14+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: My system is Ubuntu 64 bits Lucid Lynx. with this following small program, I obtain a crazy segmentation fault in strchr() with gcc4.4.3-4ubuntu5 AND NOT with gcc4.4.1-4ubuntu9 (with same glibc in both case) : // gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3 -> execution gives a "segmentation fault" // gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.1-4ubuntu9) 4.4.1 -> execution is fully OK #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> char t[]="It: is a gcc4.4.3 bug"; main() { char *p; puts(t); p = strchr(t, ':'); printf("p='%s'\n", p); return 0; } Many best regards. Eric. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T17:20:04+00:00 Rguenth wrote: Works for me (thus I suggest to file a bug with Ubuntu). Which optimization options? Please attach preprocessed source. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:34:28+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20234 Preprocessed source not OK with "gcc -E main.c" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:34:49+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20235 Preprocessed source OK with "gcc -E main.c" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:35:49+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20236 a.out OK obtained by command "gcc main.c" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:36:15+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20237 a.out not OK obtained by command "gcc main.c" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:37:42+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Here are new files (preprocessed sources OK and not OK) and binaries obtained only with command "gcc main.c" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:45:18+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20238 a.out OK obtained by command "gcc -g main.c" (with debug infos on 64bit ubuntu) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:45:44+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20239 a.out not OK obtained by command "gcc -g main.c" (with debug infos on 64bit ubuntu) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:52:14+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20240 File obtained with command "strace -s 1024 ./a_ok_withdebug.out > strace_s1024_a_ok.txt 2>&1" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T20:52:36+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20241 File obtained with command "strace -s 1024 ./a_nok_withdebug.out > strace_s1024_a_nok.txt 2>&1" Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-28T21:01:51+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20242 File obtained with command "strace -s 1024 ./a_nok_withdebug.out > strace_s1024_a_nok.txt 2>&1" (executed on the SAME SYSTEM than file attachment #20240 that was OK) Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T07:56:08+00:00 Pawel-sikora-9 wrote: i can confirm that gpf on my system (gcc-4.4.4, glibc-2.11.1). i see diffs in relocations. $ readelf -sW a_ok*|grep strchr 5: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 (2) 70: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 $ readelf -sW a_nok*|grep strchr 5: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 (2) 69: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T08:08:39+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Dear Pawel, Please could you tell me exactly if you had gpf on your system by recompiling and then executing my main.c ? Many thanks for your contribution. Eric. (In reply to comment #12) > i can confirm that gpf on my system (gcc-4.4.4, glibc-2.11.1). > i see diffs in relocations. > > $ readelf -sW a_ok*|grep strchr > 5: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 (2) > 70: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > $ readelf -sW a_nok*|grep strchr > 5: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 (2) > 69: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 > Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/13 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T08:23:13+00:00 Pawel-sikora-9 wrote: (In reply to comment #13) > Dear Pawel, > Please could you tell me exactly if you had gpf on your system by recompiling > and then executing my main.c ? i've only ran attached binaries (a_{n}ok_withdebug.out) under gdb. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/14 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T08:46:59+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: What's happened if you recompile and run main.c with your gcc4.4.4 ? (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > > Dear Pawel, > > Please could you tell me exactly if you had gpf on your system by > > recompiling > > and then executing my main.c ? > > i've only ran attached binaries (a_{n}ok_withdebug.out) under gdb. > Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/15 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T08:50:14+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Created attachment 20246 main.c with segmentation fault if compiled with gcc-4.4.3 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T09:05:19+00:00 Pawel-sikora-9 wrote: (In reply to comment #15) > What's happened if you recompile and run main.c with your gcc4.4.4 ? works fine because my toolchain doesn't emit STT_GNU_IFUNC mark for strchr() symbol. you should ask Ubuntu support about this issue. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T09:11:50+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: Thanks Pawel. (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #15) > > What's happened if you recompile and run main.c with your gcc4.4.4 ? > > works fine because my toolchain doesn't emit STT_GNU_IFUNC > mark for strchr() symbol. you should ask Ubuntu support about > this issue. > Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/18 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T09:45:30+00:00 Rguenth wrote: Maybe HJL has an idea, too. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T13:55:37+00:00 Hjl-tools wrote: (In reply to comment #12) > i can confirm that gpf on my system (gcc-4.4.4, glibc-2.11.1). > i see diffs in relocations. > > $ readelf -sW a_ok*|grep strchr > 5: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 (2) > 70: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > $ readelf -sW a_nok*|grep strchr > 5: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 (2) > 69: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 > This is a linker bug. Please report it to Ubuntu. Undefined functions should never be marked as IFUNC. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T14:59:34+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: OK, I'm going to transfer this problem to Ubuntu. The linker is GNU ld in package binutils, isn't it ? (In reply to comment #20) > (In reply to comment #12) > > i can confirm that gpf on my system (gcc-4.4.4, glibc-2.11.1). > > i see diffs in relocations. > > > > $ readelf -sW a_ok*|grep strchr > > 5: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > (2) > > 70: 0000000000000000 0 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT UND strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > > > $ readelf -sW a_nok*|grep strchr > > 5: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > (2) > > 69: 0000000000601050 41 IFUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 26 strchr@@GLIBC_2.2.5 > > > > This is a linker bug. Please report it to Ubuntu. Undefined > functions should never be marked as IFUNC. > Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T15:01:53+00:00 Hjl-tools wrote: (In reply to comment #21) > OK, I'm going to transfer this problem to Ubuntu. > The linker is GNU ld in package binutils, isn't it ? > There may be 2 linkers. In any case, just report it to Ubuntu. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T16:48:52+00:00 Matthias Klose wrote: only seen with gold (2.20.1). gold from the trunk does work. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T20:44:06+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: I checked on my Ubuntu 64bit Lucid Lynx system that generates bad binary : 1) binutils (2.20.1-3ubuntu1) is installed 2) binutils-gold (2.20-0ubuntu2) is NOT installed (In reply to comment #23) > only seen with gold (2.20.1). gold from the trunk does work. > Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/24 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2010-03-29T21:48:11+00:00 Eric CABRET wrote: I've reported this problem to Ubuntu at this following URL : https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/551245 Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/551245/comments/29 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/551245 Title: Ubuntu 64bit Lucid Lynx : segmentation fault in strchr() obtained with gcc4.4.3 and not with gcc4.4.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc/+bug/551245/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
