[Bug target/49688] New: [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[Bug target/49688] New: [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

           Summary: [alpha]: Many execution test failures
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.7.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: ubizjak@gmail.com
                CC: rth@gcc.gnu.org, bernds@gcc.gnu.org
            Target: alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu


Recent contributions between "4.7.0 20110702 (experimental) [trunk revision
175781]" and "4.7.0 20110708 (experimental) [trunk revision 176030]" severely
regressed many execution tests in the testsuite.

[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-07/msg00261.html
[2] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-07/msg00989.html

Authors of suspected commits (probably dwarf2 rewrite, since exceptions are not
working at all) added to CC.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 19:37:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 24765
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24765
asm source that compiles to good executable

This asm was produced by compiling gcc.dg/cleanup-10.c with -fexceptions
-fnon-call-exceptions -O2 compile flags.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 19:39:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 24766
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24766
asm source that compiles to good executable

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2011.07.14 19:44:03
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 19:44:03 UTC ---
Two attached sources were created with

GOOD: GCC: (GNU) 4.7.0 20110708 (experimental) [trunk revision 176025]
BAD : GCC: (GNU) 4.7.0 20110707 (experimental) [trunk revision 176014]

00:17     r176025 - /trunk/gcc/DATESTAMP     gccadmin
00:17     r176024 - /branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc/DATESTAMP     gccadmin
00:17     r176023 - /branches/gcc-4_5-branch/gcc/DATESTAMP     gccadmin
00:16     r176022 - /branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/DATESTAMP     gccadmin
00:14     r176021 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog config/alpha...     rth
00:13     r176020 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog Makefile.in ...     rth
00:05     r176019 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog ada/ChangeLo...     rth

July 07, 2011
23:57     r176018 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog dwarf2cfi.c ...     rth
23:51     r176017 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog dwarf2cfi.c ...     rth
23:42     r176016 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog dwarf2cfi.c ...     rth
23:35     r176015 - in /trunk/gcc: ChangeLog Makefile.in ...     rth
21:55     r176014 - in /branches/gcc-4_6-branch/gcc: cp/C...     jason

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 19:56:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 24767
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24767
bad executable, contents of the .eh_frame section

bad:     file format elf64-alpha

Contents of the .eh_frame section:

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 19:57:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 24768
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24768
good executable, contents of the .eh_frame section

good:     file format elf64-alpha

Contents of the .eh_frame section:

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[bernds at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt <bernds at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-14 20:16:38 UTC ---
Are you sure these were configured the same way? One of the output files is
using .cfi directives while the other isn't.

Could you post a .i file? cleanup-10.c needs headers...

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 20:32:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 24769
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24769
Preprocessed source.

Gzipped cleanup-10.i preprocessed source.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 20:34:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Are you sure these were configured the same way? One of the output files is
> using .cfi directives while the other isn't.

Yes, compiler is configured and built the same way in both cases.

> Could you post a .i file? cleanup-10.c needs headers...

Done.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[rth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-14 20:37:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Are you sure these were configured the same way? One of the output files is
> using .cfi directives while the other isn't.

Lack of .cfi was caused by that MIPS_DEBUGGING_INFO thing 
leaking into alpha/elf.h that I fixed recently.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[bernds at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #10 from Bernd Schmidt <bernds at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-14 20:40:40 UTC ---
Well, the new use of .cfi directives probably comes from this bit that was
committed in between the two revisions:

Index: gcc/config/alpha/elf.h
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/alpha/elf.h      (revision 176014)
+++ gcc/config/alpha/elf.h      (revision 176025)
@@ -25,8 +25,9 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.

 /* ??? Move all SDB stuff from alpha.h to osf.h.  */
 #undef SDB_DEBUGGING_INFO
+#undef MIPS_DEBUGGING_INFO
+#undef DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO

-#define DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO 1
 #define DWARF2_DEBUGGING_INFO 1

 #undef  PREFERRED_DEBUGGING_TYPE

Can you revert that and try again?

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #11 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 21:12:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 24771
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24771
asm source at r176020

Indeed, reverting the patch from Comment 10 fixed cleanup-10.c execution
failure!

I am bootstrapping and regtesting the compiler with the patch reverted.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[bernds at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #12 from Bernd Schmidt <bernds at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-14 21:21:15 UTC ---
Just guessing now, but you might also want to try a different version of
binutils - maybe there's a problem with .cfi directive handling?

Or maybe this has just never been tested with an alpha gas due to the
MIPS_DEBUGGING_INFO?

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #13 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-14 21:27:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Just guessing now, but you might also want to try a different version of
> binutils - maybe there's a problem with .cfi directive handling?

Due to some other ld problems, I am testing with LD_FOR_TARGET:

GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.21.52.20110623

> Or maybe this has just never been tested with an alpha gas due to the
> MIPS_DEBUGGING_INFO?

rth will know this better than I ...

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[rth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #14 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-14 21:34:16 UTC ---
Well, .cfi handling in gas isn't totally untested because
there's plenty of glibc asm files that use it.

But I have to concede that there might be a bug.  We'll 
have to examine the actual generated unwind info with and
without the change.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #15 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-07-15 07:08:46 UTC ---
Results with a patched compiler [1], no regressions.

[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-07/msg01678.html

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #16 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-08-02 06:16:21 UTC ---
Still happens with unpatched compiler, gcc 4.7.0 20110801 [1].

[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-08/msg00190.html

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[rth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot       |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
                   |gnu.org                     |

--- Comment #17 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-02 23:40:22 UTC ---
Mine.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[rth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #18 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-05 17:33:05 UTC ---
Argh.  The problem is that if we emit both 

  .ent / .frame / .mask / .end

notes and .cfi directives, the .cfi directives get ignored.

Thus the .cfi_personality directive did not in fact register
a personality, so no exceptions ever get caught.

I'll see if I can make the assembler DTRT, or at minimum
generate some sort of error message and then change the
compiler to match.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[rth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #19 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-05 17:44:43 UTC ---
Err, it's slightly more complicated than that.

We're emitting *both* a frame from .ent/.end *and* a frame from .cfi.
The later has the personality info, and the former does not. And of
course it's going to be more or less random which one the binary search 
picks up at runtime.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[rth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #20 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-05 19:04:20 UTC ---
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-08/msg00052.html

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #21 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-08-06 06:29:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-08/msg00052.html

Works ok on native alpha [1].

There are two remaining problems, an assert in "as", as reported in [2]

FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition2.C compilation,  -Os  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition2.C execution,    -Os  -fprofile-use

/tmp/cccx2jTq.s: Assembler messages:^M
/tmp/cccx2jTq.s:122: Error: invalid operands (.text.unlikely and .text.startup
sections) for `-'^M
/home/uros/bin/as: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.21.52.20110623 assertion fail
elf.c:2826^M
g++: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault (program as)^M
Please submit a full bug report,^M
with preprocessed source if appropriate.^M
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.^M
compiler exited with status 1

 and

FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -g  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -g  -fprofile-use
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O0  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O0  -fprofile-use
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O1  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O1  -fprofile-use
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O2  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O2  -fprofile-use
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O3  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O3  -fprofile-use
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O3 -g  -fprofile-use
(internal compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O3 -g  -fprofile-use
FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -Os  -fprofile-use (internal
compiler error)
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -Os  -fprofile-use

/home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C: In
function 'void foo()':^M
/home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C:46:1:
internal compiler error: in reload_combine_note_use, at postreload.c:1538^M
Please submit a full bug report,^M
with preprocessed source if appropriate.^M
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.^M


[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-08/msg00614.html
[2] http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-08/msg00056.html

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #22 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-08-06 07:21:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)

> There are two remaining problems, an assert in "as", as reported in [2]
> 
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition2.C compilation,  -Os  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition2.C execution,    -Os  -fprofile-use

This is PR 49972, reportedly fixed in binutils [1].

> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -g  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -g  -fprofile-use
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O0  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O0  -fprofile-use
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O1  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O1  -fprofile-use
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O2  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O2  -fprofile-use
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O3  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O3  -fprofile-use
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -O3 -g  -fprofile-use
> (internal compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -O3 -g  -fprofile-use
> FAIL: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C compilation,  -Os  -fprofile-use (internal
> compiler error)
> UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/tree-prof/partition1.C execution,    -Os  -fprofile-use

This is now reported as PR 50001.

[1] http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-08/msg00057.html

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

--- Comment #23 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-08-06 07:24:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)

> This is PR 49972, reportedly fixed in binutils [1].

Er, the ice in gas with invalid .gcc_except_table is fixed in binutis.

[Bug target/49688] [alpha]: Many execution test failures

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688

Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.7.0

--- Comment #24 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2011-08-06 18:58:49 UTC ---
Testsuite results are clean with patched gas.

Fixed.