[Bug bootstrap/53197] New: [4.8 Regression] bootstrap failure on Linux/ia32

[Bug bootstrap/53197] New: [4.8 Regression] bootstrap failure on Linux/ia32

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

             Bug #: 53197
           Summary: [4.8 Regression] bootstrap failure on Linux/ia32
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: bootstrap
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: hjl.tools@gmail.com


On Linux/ia32, revision 187054 gave

make[6]: Leaving directory `/export/gnu/import/git/gcc-test-ia32corei7/bld'
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1obj-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.o differs
gcc/tree-cfg.o differs
gcc/tree-emutls.o differs
gcc/tree-if-conv.o differs
gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.o differs
gcc/tree-ssa-live.o differs
gcc/tree-object-size.o differs
gcc/trans-mem.o differs
gcc/tree-sra.o differs
gcc/tree-inline.o differs
make[5]: *** [compare] Error 1

when configured with

--with-arch=corei7 --with-cpu=corei7 --prefix=/usr/local --enable-clocale=gnu
--with-system-zlib --enable-shared --with-demangler-in-ld i686-linux
--with-fpmath=sse --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,java,lto,objc

Revision 187051 is OK.

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-05-02
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.8.0
            Summary|[4.8 Regression] bootstrap  |[4.8 Regression] bootstrap
                   |failure on Linux/ia32       |comparison failure
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
           Severity|normal                      |critical

--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2012-05-02 18:21:34 UTC ---
Also fails on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, without any configure flags.

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |matz at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2012-05-02 18:39:49 UTC ---
r187051 is OK.
r187054 fails.

It is Michael's mega patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=187053

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #3 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 21:29:24 UTC ---
Hmpf, x86_64-linux works for me just fine.
Hopefully I can reproduce the 32bit bootstrap fail :-/

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 22:17:26 UTC ---
Definitely affects x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu too, my bootstrap failed with this
config:

/home/jwakely/src/gcc/configure --prefix=/home/jwakely/gcc/4.x
--with-system-zlib --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as --disable-libitm
--disable-libquadmath --disable-libmudflap --enable-libstdcxx-debug
--enable-libstdcxx-time=rt --enable-languages=c,c++

It builds OK with --disable-bootstrap though

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #5 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 22:21:31 UTC ---
Without help this will be impossible to debug for me.  I can't reproduce with
either x86_64-linux (no configure options), nor under linux32 personality
(without options and with HJs options); I tried on two machines (in Intel, one
AMD).

Uros and Jonathan: does it fail in the same way as for HJ?  I.e. same
miscomparing files?

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW
   Target Milestone|4.8.0                       |---
           Severity|critical                    |normal

--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2012-05-02 22:23:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Without help this will be impossible to debug for me.  I can't reproduce with
> either x86_64-linux (no configure options), nor under linux32 personality
> (without options and with HJs options); I tried on two machines (in Intel, one
> AMD).

Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[ubizjak at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> 2012-05-02 22:27:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Without help this will be impossible to debug for me.  I can't reproduce with
> either x86_64-linux (no configure options), nor under linux32 personality
> (without options and with HJs options); I tried on two machines (in Intel, one
> AMD).
> 
> Uros and Jonathan: does it fail in the same way as for HJ?  I.e. same
> miscomparing files?

Yes, they are the same:

Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.o differs
gcc/tree-sra.o differs
gcc/tree-emutls.o differs
gcc/tree-if-conv.o differs
gcc/trans-mem.o differs
gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.o differs
gcc/tree-object-size.o differs
gcc/tree-ssa-live.o differs
gcc/tree-cfg.o differs
gcc/tree-inline.o differs
gmake[2]: *** [compare] Error 1

FYI, my binutils are: GNU ld version 2.21.53.0.1-6.fc16 20110716

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #8 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 22:29:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> 
> Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?

No: binutils-2.21.1-60.1.x86_64 .

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2012-05-02 22:33:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > 
> > Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?
> 
> No: binutils-2.21.1-60.1.x86_64 .

Please try binutils 2.22.

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 22:39:48 UTC ---
Same files:

Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.o differs
gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.o differs
gcc/tree-ssa-live.o differs
gcc/trans-mem.o differs
gcc/tree-inline.o differs
gcc/tree-object-size.o differs
gcc/tree-emutls.o differs
gcc/tree-if-conv.o differs
gcc/tree-cfg.o differs
gcc/tree-sra.o differs
make[2]: *** [compare] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/jwakely/build'
make[1]: *** [stage3-bubble] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/jwakely/build'
make: *** [all] Error 2

That's on gcc20 in the compile farm, using
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.20.1-system.20100303

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #11 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 22:53:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > > Are you using binutils 2.22 or newer?
> > 
> > No: binutils-2.21.1-60.1.x86_64 .
> 
> Please try binutils 2.22.

Even though Jonathan uses 2.20 and also has broken bootstrap?  In any case
also with Jonathans options I don't reproduce a segfault.

I'll try binutils 2.22 now.

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #12 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-02 23:22:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> 
> I'll try binutils 2.22 now.

Doesn't help, still no miscompare :-/

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2012-05-03 00:02:26 UTC ---
Created attachment 27294
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27294
auto-host.h on Fedora/15/x86-64

Here is auto-host.h on Fedora/15/x86-64.  How does it compare
against yours?

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #14 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-03 00:13:16 UTC ---
Thanks to Jonathan I have a hunch now.  He has BUILD_CONFIG=bootstrap-debug
whereas I have BUILD_CONFIG empty for all my machines.

This means that for him stage2 is built with -g -gtoggle (effectively switching
off -g again), and stage3 with -g, and the compares then do the comparison
ignoring the debug info.

For me stage2 and stage3 are built with -g.  The -g switch seems to influence
code generation with my patch (I tested that compiling the stage3 file
on the broken tree with -gtoggle produces the same as the stage2 file),
which of course is a bug.  But I haven't seen it because all my files are
built with -g.

Now, as to why for me BUILD_CONFIG isn't bootstrap-debug: configure.ac
activates this by default, but then checks if contrib/compare-debug
actually works for comparing a debug and non-debug .o file.  And for
SuSE systems it doesn't, because our system compilers encode some command
line options (among them -g) into a special .comment section.

In any case, this code difference for -g vs. non-g has to be fixed, which
I'm in the process of doing.

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

--- Comment #15 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-03 02:32:13 UTC ---
Author: matz
Date: Thu May  3 02:32:08 2012
New Revision: 187074

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187074
Log:
    PR bootstrap/53197
    * tree-ssa-dse.c (dse_optimize_stmt): Take pointer to
    iterator.
    (dse_enter_block): Properly iterate the whole sequence even
    if the last statement was removed.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/tree-ssa-dse.c

[Bug bootstrap/53197] [4.8 Regression] bootstrap comparison failure

[matz at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53197

Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #16 from Michael Matz <matz at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-03 02:35:36 UTC ---
Should be fixed.