* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-29 10:18 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 10:19 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-29 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:17:20 UTC ---
Created attachment 24143
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24143
assembler output before patch
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 10:18 ` [Bug middle-end/48819] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-29 10:19 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 10:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-29 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:18:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 24144
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24144
assembler output after patch
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 10:18 ` [Bug middle-end/48819] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 10:19 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-29 10:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 10:40 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-29 10:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:30:33 UTC ---
Can you check if
Index: tree.c
===================================================================
--- tree.c (revision 173151)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ build_int_cst (tree type, HOST_WIDE_INT
{
/* Support legacy code. */
if (!type)
- type = integer_type_node;
+ return build_int_cst_wide (integer_type_node, low, low < 0 ? -1 : 0);
return double_int_to_tree (type, shwi_to_double_int (low));
}
fixes it?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 10:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-29 10:40 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-04-29 10:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2011-04-29 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-04-29 10:40:14 UTC ---
> --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:30:33 UTC ---
> Can you check if
>
> Index: tree.c
> ===================================================================
> --- tree.c (revision 173151)
> +++ tree.c (working copy)
> @@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ build_int_cst (tree type, HOST_WIDE_INT
> {
> /* Support legacy code. */
> if (!type)
> - type = integer_type_node;
> + return build_int_cst_wide (integer_type_node, low, low < 0 ? -1 : 0);
>
> return double_int_to_tree (type, shwi_to_double_int (low));
> }
>
> fixes it?
Yep, at least rebuilding jc1 with that patch and rebuilding
ArrayStore.exe fixes the testcase.
Thanks.
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 10:40 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2011-04-29 10:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 12:37 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-29 10:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:44:54 UTC ---
Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
is using all HOST_WIDE_INT bits (I suppose 64 on sparc-sun-solaris2?) but
integer_type_node has less precision.
Java maintainers, please go over build_int_cst (NULL_TREE, ...) users
and replace NULL_TREE with an appropriate type. Using size_int (...)
might be a good idea in some places (wtf get_tag_node ...).
I'm not sure what _CD_ArrayStore is.
If the patch helps the following should point to the bug in the Java frontend:
Index: tree.c
===================================================================
--- tree.c (revision 173151)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -1019,7 +1019,12 @@ build_int_cst (tree type, HOST_WIDE_INT
{
/* Support legacy code. */
if (!type)
- type = integer_type_node;
+ {
+ double_int a = shwi_to_double_int (low);
+ double_int b = double_int_sext (a, TYPE_PRECISION (integer_type_node));
+ gcc_assert (double_int_equal_p (a, b));
+ return build_int_cst_wide (integer_type_node, low, low < 0 ? -1 : 0);
+ }
return double_int_to_tree (type, shwi_to_double_int (low));
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 10:46 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-29 12:37 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-04-29 12:42 ` rguenther at suse dot de
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2011-04-29 12:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-04-29 12:32:34 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:44:54 UTC ---
> Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
> is using all HOST_WIDE_INT bits (I suppose 64 on sparc-sun-solaris2?) but
Indeed.
> I'm not sure what _CD_ArrayStore is.
It's contructed in gcc/java/constants.c (build_constant_data_ref).
> If the patch helps the following should point to the bug in the Java frontend:
I get
In file included from <built-in>:3:0:
ArrayStore.java:51:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst, at tree.c:1017
with the following stacktrace:
#0 fancy_abort (file=0x910608 "/var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/tree.c", line=1017,
function=0x912a28 "build_int_cst")
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:893
#1 0x005fbc18 in build_int_cst (type=0x0, low=562971428257792)
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/tree.c:1017
#2 0x000da1cc in build_constants_constructor ()
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/constants.c:547
#3 0x000b57c8 in make_class_data (type=0xfef33620)
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/class.c:2059
#4 0x000bba4c in finish_class ()
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/class.c:2261
#5 0x000eeed0 in parse_class_file ()
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/jcf-parse.c:1662
#6 0x000ef34c in parse_zip_file_entries ()
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/jcf-parse.c:2103
#7 0x000f021c in java_parse_file ()
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/jcf-parse.c:1933
#8 0x00440868 in compile_file () at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:579
#9 do_compile () at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:1913
#10 0x0044137c in toplev_main (argc=22, argv=0xffbff3b4)
at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:1976
#11 0x000a5744 in _start ()
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 12:37 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2011-04-29 12:42 ` rguenther at suse dot de
2011-04-29 12:53 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: rguenther at suse dot de @ 2011-04-29 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-04-29 12:40:19 UTC ---
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
>
> --- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-04-29 12:32:34 UTC ---
> > --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 10:44:54 UTC ---
> > Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
> > is using all HOST_WIDE_INT bits (I suppose 64 on sparc-sun-solaris2?) but
>
> Indeed.
>
> > I'm not sure what _CD_ArrayStore is.
>
> It's contructed in gcc/java/constants.c (build_constant_data_ref).
>
> > If the patch helps the following should point to the bug in the Java frontend:
>
> I get
>
> In file included from <built-in>:3:0:
> ArrayStore.java:51:0: internal compiler error: in build_int_cst, at tree.c:1017
>
> with the following stacktrace:
>
> #0 fancy_abort (file=0x910608 "/var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/tree.c", line=1017,
> function=0x912a28 "build_int_cst")
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:893
> #1 0x005fbc18 in build_int_cst (type=0x0, low=562971428257792)
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/tree.c:1017
> #2 0x000da1cc in build_constants_constructor ()
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/constants.c:547
> #3 0x000b57c8 in make_class_data (type=0xfef33620)
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/class.c:2059
> #4 0x000bba4c in finish_class ()
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/class.c:2261
> #5 0x000eeed0 in parse_class_file ()
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/jcf-parse.c:1662
> #6 0x000ef34c in parse_zip_file_entries ()
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/jcf-parse.c:2103
> #7 0x000f021c in java_parse_file ()
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/java/jcf-parse.c:1933
> #8 0x00440868 in compile_file () at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:579
> #9 do_compile () at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:1913
> #10 0x0044137c in toplev_main (argc=22, argv=0xffbff3b4)
> at /var/gcc/reghunt/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:1976
> #11 0x000a5744 in _start ()
Which shows
CONSTRUCTOR_PREPEND_VALUE (d,
fold_convert (ptr_type_node,
(build_int_cst
(NULL_TREE,
temp))));
ick. So, I suppose
CONSTRUCTOR_PREPEND_VALUE (d, build_int_cst (ptr_type_node,
temp));
would fix it as well. Patch is obvious if it works for your testcase.
Richard.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 12:42 ` rguenther at suse dot de
@ 2011-04-29 12:53 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-04-29 14:18 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2011-04-29 12:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-04-29 12:50:00 UTC ---
> ick. So, I suppose
>
> CONSTRUCTOR_PREPEND_VALUE (d, build_int_cst (ptr_type_node,
> temp));
>
> would fix it as well. Patch is obvious if it works for your testcase.
Indeed it does. I'll rebuild/retest libjava to make sure all is fine
before installing.
Thanks.
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 12:53 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2011-04-29 14:18 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-04-29 19:38 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2011-04-29 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-04-29 14:17:30 UTC ---
PR48769 looks like a duplicate of this PR. As I said in this pr I am traveling
and have limited testing capabilities.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 14:18 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2011-04-29 19:38 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-04-29 19:43 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-04-29 19:49 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-29 19:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 19:36:15 UTC ---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Apr 29 19:36:12 2011
New Revision: 173183
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173183
Log:
2011-04-29 Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>
PR middle-end/48819
* constants.c (build_constants_constructor): Use ptr_type_node for
temp.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/java/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/java/constants.c
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 19:38 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2011-04-29 19:43 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2011-04-29 19:49 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2011-04-29 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-04-29 19:42:13 UTC ---
> --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2011-04-29 14:17:30 UTC ---
> PR48769 looks like a duplicate of this PR. As I said in this pr I am traveling
> and have limited testing capabilities.
Indeed, though I can only test 32-bit PowerPC Darwin. The similarity of
affected tests is appaling.
Rainer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/48819] [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC
2011-04-29 10:18 [Bug middle-end/48819] New: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit libjava testsuite on SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2011-04-29 19:43 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2011-04-29 19:49 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-04-29 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL| |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
| |atches/2011-04/msg02354.htm
| |l
Resolution| |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #12 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-04-29 19:46:07 UTC ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread