From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81542 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2015 21:39:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 81470 invoked by uid 48); 10 Mar 2015 21:39:07 -0000 From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/63491] Ice in LRA with simple vector test case on power Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:39:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: rtl-optimization X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: bergner at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg01168.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D63491 --- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Vladimir Makarov from comment #7) > I tried again the test on gcc rev. 221324 (Mar 10) with the mentioned > options and I've failed to reproduce the crash. Maybe a configure option thing? Maybe --disable-bootstrap which I have been using? I just tried using the same revision you did (221324) and I still s= ee the same error: Target: powerpc64-linux Configured with: /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/configure --target=3Dpowerpc64-linux --host=3Dpowerpc64-linux --build=3Dpowerpc64-lin= ux --enable-threads=3Dposix --enable-shared --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-languages=3Dc,c++ --enable-secureplt --enable-checking=3Dyes --with-gmp=3D/home/bergner/tools/meissner --with-mpfr=3D/home/bergner/tools/meissner --with-mpc=3D/home/bergner/tools/meissner --with-long-double-128 --enable-decimal-float --disable-bootstrap --disable-alsa --prefix=3D/home/bergner/gcc/install/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra-r221324 Thread model: posix gcc version 5.0.0 20150310 (experimental) [trunk revision 221324] (GCC)=20 [bergner@makalu-lp1 LRA]$ /home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra-r221324/gcc/xgcc -B/home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra-r221324/gcc -O1 -m64 -mcpu=3Dpower8 -mlra -S pr63491.i pr63491.i: In function =E2=80=98foo=E2=80= =99: pr63491.i:14:1: internal compiler error: in check_and_process_move, at lra-constraints.c:1171 } ^ 0x1099c933 check_and_process_move /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/gcc/lra-constraints.c:1168 0x109a5313 curr_insn_transform /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/gcc/lra-constraints.c:3464 0x109a9b93 lra_constraints(bool) /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/gcc/lra-constraints.c:4452 0x10989da3 lra(_IO_FILE*) /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/gcc/lra.c:2301 0x1090cb97 do_reload /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/gcc/ira.c:5418 0x1090d22f execute /home/bergner/gcc/gcc-fsf-mainline-vlad-lra/gcc/ira.c:5589 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report. See for instructions. >>From gcc-bugs-return-480025-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Mar 10 21:52:33 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 60112 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2015 21:52:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 60040 invoked by uid 48); 10 Mar 2015 21:52:29 -0000 From: "boger at us dot ibm.com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug go/64999] s390x libgo test failure in TestMemoryProfiler Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:52:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: go X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: boger at us dot ibm.com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ian at airs dot com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg01169.txt.bz2 Content-length: 2014 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64999 --- Comment #50 from boger at us dot ibm.com --- (In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #49) > libbacktrace returns the line number that you actually care about: the line > number of the call instruction. There is no question that that is correct. > > You say that it is a problem if the PC does not match the line number, but > to me that sounds like a conceptual problem. What is the actual problem? > > The pprof.go code expects to get the PC after the call instruction, and > tries to turn it into the PC of the call instruction. I think we can all > agree that pprof.go should in fact see the PC after the call instruction. > The simple way to do that is for callback in libgo/runtime/go-callers.c to > increment pc before storing it in loc->pc. Apparently there is some problem > with that but I do not know what that problem is. > > The additional argument I mentioned would be for the function types > backtrace_fulL_callback and backtrace_simple_callback defined in > libbacktrace/backtrace.h. The additional argument would be, essentially, > the value of ip_before_insn in libbacktrace/backtrace.c and > libbacktrace/simple.c. The argument would tell you whether the PC follows a > call instruction, or whether it is the correct PC for a signal frame > instruction OK. I didn't realize that backtrace_full is expected to return an array of Location structures which contain the PC for the instruction following the call but the line number for the call. When I saw there was a single structure containing a PC and lineno, I assumed that it was intended to hold information for a single location, i.e., a PC and the lineno that corresponded to it. I will go back and try this again as you suggested. I had tried several variations and hit different errors and when I saw how the line number and PC were out of sync that steered me down the wrong path. Now that I understand what it really should be I think it should probably work.