* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-01 19:12 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-01 22:36 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (18 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-01 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-01 19:12 ` [Bug middle-end/114912] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-01 22:36 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-01 22:38 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (17 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-01 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #1 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Since this happens while building libgcc during stage1, perhaps this can be
reproduced with a cross? Would it be possible to get the preprocessed file
that's failing?
You could try /var/gcc/reghunt/sigbus-range/288807/./gcc/xgcc -save-temps [blah
blah], and attach the libgcc2.i file that gets generated.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-01 19:12 ` [Bug middle-end/114912] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-01 22:36 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-01 22:38 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 5:26 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (16 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-01 22:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
What compiler version are you starting with?
It could be that compiler is miscompiling stage 1 here; especially when it
comes to C++ usage is becoming more and more.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-01 22:38 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 5:26 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 5:28 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 5:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #1)
> Since this happens while building libgcc during stage1, perhaps this can be
> reproduced with a cross? Would it be possible to get the preprocessed file
> that's failing?
I doubt this can be seen in a cross: running the compilation under truss
reveals
the SIGBUS as
2834: Incurred fault #5, FLTACCESS %pc = 0x00723E58
2834: siginfo: SIGBUS BUS_ADRALN addr=0xFFBFC954
2834: Received signal #10, SIGBUS [caught]
2834: siginfo: SIGBUS BUS_ADRALN addr=0xFFBFC954
i.e. an unaligned access. While SPARC is a strict-alignment target, x86 cares
little if any about alignment at all.
> You could try /var/gcc/reghunt/sigbus-range/288807/./gcc/xgcc -save-temps
> [blah blah], and attach the libgcc2.i file that gets generated.
Sure, please find _muldi3.i attached.
cc1 invocation is
cc1 -fpreprocessed _muldi3.i -quiet -dumpbase _muldi3.c -dumpbase-ext .c
-mcpu=v9 -g -g -g -O2 -O2 -O2 -Wextra -Wall -Wno-narrowing -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition
-version -fbuilding-libgcc -fno-stack-protector -fPIC -fvisibility=hidden -o
_muldi3.s
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 5:26 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 5:28 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 5:29 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 5:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 58081
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58081&action=edit
preprocessed input
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 5:28 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 5:29 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 5:41 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 5:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I see the issue then.
char m_buffer[sizeof (int_range_max)];
Needs _Align to get the alignment correct.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 5:29 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 5:41 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 8:47 ` [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 5:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I might see if I can figure out a patch for some to try later tonight.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 5:41 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 8:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 8:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 8:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 58084
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58084&action=edit
Something like this
This should cause the char array be on the correct alignment ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 8:47 ` [Bug middle-end/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 8:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 11:16 ` [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2024-05-02
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The other way of fixing this is to use an union and I think since we are using
C++11, it might work correctly.
I do think we should prefer the union rather than having it as a char array too
...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 8:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 11:16 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 20:44 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> The other way of fixing this is to use an union and I think since we are
> using C++11, it might work correctly.
>
> I do think we should prefer the union rather than having it as a char array
> too ...
If a union works then indeed that's what we should use.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 11:16 ` [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 20:44 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-02 20:51 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (8 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-02 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
If Aldy does not fix it by Saturday, I will give the union a try then. I will
also try out the solaris machine on the compile farm if possible.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 20:44 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-02 20:51 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2024-05-03 9:08 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2024-05-02 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> If Aldy does not fix it by Saturday, I will give the union a try then. I will
Great, thanks. Your alignas patch also worked fine btw.
> also try out the solaris machine on the compile farm if possible.
Otherwise, you can just send it my way and I'll give it a whirl.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-02 20:51 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2024-05-03 9:08 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-08 17:05 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-03 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #12 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #10)
> If Aldy does not fix it by Saturday, I will give the union a try then. I
> will also try out the solaris machine on the compile farm if possible.
Sorry, didn't mean for you to pick this up. Thanks for the analysis. I can
take it from here.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-03 9:08 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-08 17:05 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-08 17:14 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (5 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-08 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
BTW, I'm waiting for a review, or at least a nod from a C++ savvy person here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650634.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-08 17:05 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-08 17:14 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2024-05-08 20:39 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2024-05-08 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> BTW, I'm waiting for a review, or at least a nod from a C++ savvy person here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650634.html
I can give the patch a whirl, thanks.
I had Andrew's patch in my tree to avoid the issue. Unfortunately,
Solaris/SPARC bootstrap is broken again due to PR ipa/114985.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-08 17:14 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2024-05-08 20:39 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-08 20:40 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-08 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #15 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 58136
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58136&action=edit
proposed patch in testing
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-08 20:39 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-08 20:40 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-09 5:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-08 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #16 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #14)
> > --- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > BTW, I'm waiting for a review, or at least a nod from a C++ savvy person here:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650634.html
>
> I can give the patch a whirl, thanks.
I've attached a rebased patch against current mainline. Let me know if it
works on your end, and I'll commit.
>
> I had Andrew's patch in my tree to avoid the issue. Unfortunately,
> Solaris/SPARC bootstrap is broken again due to PR ipa/114985.
I have provided a patch for that PR as well, but the IPA folk need to say if
this is the correct approach.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-08 20:40 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-09 5:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-09 9:54 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2024-05-09 10:02 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-09 5:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #17 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7ff8ae5313bea755f5960786b33a7b151e7b663
commit r15-336-gd7ff8ae5313bea755f5960786b33a7b151e7b663
Author: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
Date: Fri May 3 11:17:32 2024 +0200
[ranger] Force buffer alignment in Value_Range [PR114912]
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/114912
* value-range.h (class Value_Range): Use a union.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-09 5:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-09 9:54 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2024-05-09 10:02 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2024-05-09 9:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
--- Comment #18 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #16 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> (In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #14)
>> > --- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
>> > BTW, I'm waiting for a review, or at least a nod from a C++ savvy
>> > person here:
>> >
>> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650634.html
>>
>> I can give the patch a whirl, thanks.
>
> I've attached a rebased patch against current mainline. Let me know if it
> works on your end, and I'll commit.
I've included both this patch ...
>> I had Andrew's patch in my tree to avoid the issue. Unfortunately,
>> Solaris/SPARC bootstrap is broken again due to PR ipa/114985.
>
> I have provided a patch for that PR as well, but the IPA folk need to say if
> this is the correct approach.
... and that one in last night's SPARC bootstraps, which worked just
fine again. Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/114912] [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC since r15-88-gc60b3e211c5557 since char array is not aligned to what it needs to be
2024-05-01 19:12 [Bug middle-end/114912] New: [15 regression] SIGBUS in wi::copy<> on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-09 9:54 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2024-05-09 10:02 ` aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
19 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-09 10:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114912
Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #19 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #18)
> > --- Comment #16 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> > (In reply to ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE from comment #14)
> >> > --- Comment #13 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> >> > BTW, I'm waiting for a review, or at least a nod from a C++ savvy
> >> > person here:
> >> >
> >> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650634.html
> >>
> >> I can give the patch a whirl, thanks.
> >
> > I've attached a rebased patch against current mainline. Let me know if it
> > works on your end, and I'll commit.
>
> I've included both this patch ...
>
> >> I had Andrew's patch in my tree to avoid the issue. Unfortunately,
> >> Solaris/SPARC bootstrap is broken again due to PR ipa/114985.
> >
> > I have provided a patch for that PR as well, but the IPA folk need to say if
> > this is the correct approach.
>
> ... and that one in last night's SPARC bootstraps, which worked just
> fine again. Thanks.
Thanks for testing. I'll close this PR as fixed in mainline then. FWIW, I
also retested on x86-64 Linux.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread