[Bug target/17209] New: ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[Bug target/17209] New: ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[dank at kegel dot com]

Building glibc's locale/programs/ld-collate.c causes failures with some arm
targets.  
The errors seem to be in the last function, which is 1200 lines long.
Exactly which ones depends a bit on exactly what version you're building.

This happens with several versions of glibc (2.2.5, 2.3.3-20040822)
and with several variants of CPU type (e.g. even plain arm supposedly may
trigger it; see http://www.handhelds.org/hypermail/kernel-discuss/0/0066.html)

It happened with gcc-3.4.0 (see
http://www.kegel.com/crosstool/crosstool-0.28-rc26/buildlogs/0.28/arm-softfloat-gcc-3.4.0-glibc-2.2.5.txt)
and again with gcc-3.4.1.   I'll attach a preprocessed input file.

-- 
           Summary: ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset
                    (4096)
           Product: gcc
           Version: 3.4.1
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: dank at kegel dot com
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: arm-xscale-linux-gnu, other arm variants


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209

[Bug target/17209] ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2004-08-27 08:11 -------
Created an attachment (id=6995)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=6995&action=view)
preprocessed output of ld-collate.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209

[Bug target/17209] ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2004-08-31 05:41 -------
Looks similar to PR16201, though this is C and that is C++...

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209

[Bug target/17209] ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-10-06 00:20 -------
Exactly what options were passed to which compiler with the attached test case?

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209

[Bug target/17209] ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2004-10-06 06:41 -------
I only had to pass -O.  It doesn't happen without -O,
and it doesn't happen with -O2 (at least in this case).

If you'd like to see it in action in a larger testcase
with gcc-3.4.2, here's how:

wget http://kegel.com/crosstool/crosstool-0.28-rc37.tar.gz
tar -xzvf crosstool-0.28-rc37.tar.gz
cd crosstool-0.28-rc37
sudo mkdir /opt/crosstool
sudo chown $USER /opt/crosstool
sh demo-pr17209.sh

I currently see the bug when building several versions
of glibc for several flavors of ARM.
It's 100% repeatable, but whether the bug bites
depends on the details of the program being compiled, so 
not all combinations of ARM target and glibc version
are affected.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209

[Bug target/17209] ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[dank at kegel dot com]

------- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com  2004-10-06 06:46 -------
You can also see log tails of the problem in action at
http://www.kegel.com/crosstool/crosstool-0.28-rc37/buildlogs/0.28/
Five of the arm gcc-3.4.2 failures there are due to this
problem.  (The other three are due to an ICE in flow.c:3257.)

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209

[Bug target/17209] ld-collate.s: Error: bad immediate value for offset (4096)

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-31 15:55 -------
This is indeed a duplicate of PR16201

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 16201 ***

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |DUPLICATE


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17209