From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-339035-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7065 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2010 10:13:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 7046 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Dec 2010 10:13:01 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:12:55 +0000
From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/46488] [4.5 regression] server/core_filters.c from apache httpd 2.2.17 miscompiled at -O3
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: major
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenther at suse dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.5.2
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-46488-4-WAOv54gvDE@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46488-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46488-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:13:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46488

--- Comment #36 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2010-12-01 10:12:21 UTC ---
On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46488
> 
> --- Comment #35 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-30 23:25:57 UTC ---
> > I said in my comment that adding temporaries could correct the issue,
> > but they do not. I had some different test trees, and reviewing them,
> > what actually "corrected" in one of the builds was adding a volatile
> > modifier to APR_RING_HEAD, as in:
> > 
> > #define APR_RING_HEAD(head, elem)                    \
> >     struct head {                            \
> >     struct elem * volatile next;                    \
> >     struct elem * volatile prev;                    \
> >     }
> > 
> > to better match APR_RING_ENTRY.
> 
> Probably a reasonable workaround.  Having 2 different constructs APR_RING_ENTRY
> and APR_RING_HEAD for the same object is strange in any case.

If you'd re-use the same type the issue would go away as well (I think).

Richard.