public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug go/92564] libgo regression in runtime test resulting in SIGSEGV on ppc64le
[not found] <bug-92564-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2020-10-06 19:37 ` boger at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-10-06 22:14 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2020-10-08 13:51 ` boger at gcc dot gnu.org
2 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: boger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-10-06 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92564
boger at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |amodra at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org ---
More information on this bug has been added to
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/36697. The problem appears to be due the
use of split stack and possibly the gold linker is not handling the split stack
functions correctly in libgcc generic-morestack.c.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug go/92564] libgo regression in runtime test resulting in SIGSEGV on ppc64le
[not found] <bug-92564-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2020-10-06 19:37 ` [Bug go/92564] libgo regression in runtime test resulting in SIGSEGV on ppc64le boger at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-10-06 22:14 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2020-10-08 13:51 ` boger at gcc dot gnu.org
2 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: amodra at gmail dot com @ 2020-10-06 22:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92564
Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|amodra at gcc dot gnu.org |
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
Did you try Ian's suggestion of -Wl,--split-stack-adjust-size=0x8000 or even
larger?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug go/92564] libgo regression in runtime test resulting in SIGSEGV on ppc64le
[not found] <bug-92564-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2020-10-06 19:37 ` [Bug go/92564] libgo regression in runtime test resulting in SIGSEGV on ppc64le boger at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-10-06 22:14 ` amodra at gmail dot com
@ 2020-10-08 13:51 ` boger at gcc dot gnu.org
2 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: boger at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-10-08 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92564
--- Comment #3 from boger at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, I tried the value of 0x80000 and the test passed. In the issue Ian
mentioned that 0x100000 was the default on x86. If we want the same default on
x86 and ppc64 then 0x100000 would work since the value I tested with is
smaller.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-10-08 13:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-92564-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2020-10-06 19:37 ` [Bug go/92564] libgo regression in runtime test resulting in SIGSEGV on ppc64le boger at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-10-06 22:14 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2020-10-08 13:51 ` boger at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).