From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24726 invoked by alias); 27 May 2004 08:02:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24690 invoked by alias); 27 May 2004 08:02:31 -0000 Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 18:44:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040527080231.24689.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040321182857.14671.danglin@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20040321182857.14671.danglin@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug bootstrap/14671] [3.3/3.4 regression] caller-save.c:491: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg03185.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2004-05-27 08:02 ------- Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4 regression] caller-save.c:491: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault On Thu, 27 May 2004, gdr at integrable-solutions dot net wrote: > > ------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2004-05-27 03:55 ------- > Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4 regression] caller-save.c:491: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault > > "pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" writes: > > | Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4 regression] caller-save.c:491: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault > | > | > | On May 26, 2004, at 23:38, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote: > | > | > If you look at the comment in ggc-page.c for lookup_page_table_entry, > | > you will see that it says "Die (probably) if the object wasn't > | > allocated > | > via GC." The patch in question didn't create the object that caused > | > the ICE. Thus, as I indicated previously, more information is needed > | > about the object that caused the ICE, and how and when it was added > | > to the alias_invariant array. > | > | > Richard has indicated that the regression isn't present on 3.4, yet it > | > has essentially the same change. If we revert this on 3.5, the pa and > | > alpha won't build. The build problems are critical for these ports. > | > | > | I think this was fixed lately on the mainline fully by: > | . > > Andrew -- > > Thanks for the detective work. > > | Could someone test the backport of this patch, ggc_free can be safely > | removed as it is an optimization > > Richard -- > Can you try that? If it works, I'll apply it immediately, plus > Eric's patch. Whic I suppose would resolve this very interesting > issue. Ok, I just started bootstrapping a compiler with rth's patch re-applied, the fix for PR14671 and the fix from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-05/msg01413.html applied with the ggc_free hunk modified as: @@ -2985,7 +2983,6 @@ reg_base_value_size = 0; if (alias_invariant) { - free (alias_invariant); alias_invariant = 0; alias_invariant_size = 0; } -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14671