public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
@ 2021-01-18 13:09 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 13:10 ` [Bug debug/98728] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-18 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98728
Bug ID: 98728
Summary: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ro at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: mark at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: i386-pc-solaris2.11, sparc-sun-solaris2.11,
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
With the switch to DWARF-5, two debug tests have started to FAIL:
+FAIL: g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/constexpr-var-1.C scan-assembler-times
DW_AT_const_expr 2
32 and 64-bit Solaris/SPARC and x86, Linux/x86_64
+FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-float.c scan-assembler 0x10.*DW_AT_byte_size
32-bit Solaris/x86 and Linux/x86_64
Besides, there were many changes to guality tests on Linux/x86_64, both tests
previously XPASSing now XFAIL again, as well as several new FAILs.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/98728] [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
2021-01-18 13:09 [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-18 13:10 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 14:33 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-18 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98728
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/98728] [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
2021-01-18 13:09 [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 13:10 ` [Bug debug/98728] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-18 14:33 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-19 7:36 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: mark at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-18 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98728
Mark Wielaard <mark at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Mark Wielaard <mark at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hi,
Maybe this bug should be split in two (or three) for each specific FAIL?
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> With the switch to DWARF-5, two debug tests have started to FAIL:
>
> +FAIL: g++.dg/debug/dwarf2/constexpr-var-1.C scan-assembler-times
> DW_AT_const_expr 2
>
> 32 and 64-bit Solaris/SPARC and x86, Linux/x86_64
This is https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-August/552474.html
There is a suggested fix, but no consensus on whether that is a good one:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-September/553102.html
> +FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-float.c scan-assembler 0x10.*DW_AT_byte_size
>
> 32-bit Solaris/x86 and Linux/x86_64
So this fails in 32bit mode, but not in 64bit mode.
In 64bit mode gcc generates:
.uleb128 0x2 # (DIE (0x7d) DW_TAG_base_type)
.byte 0x10 # DW_AT_byte_size
# DW_AT_encoding (0x4)
.long .LASF4 # DW_AT_name: "long double"
But in 32bit mode it generates:
.uleb128 0x2 # (DIE (0x6d) DW_TAG_base_type)
.byte 0xc # DW_AT_byte_size
# DW_AT_encoding (0x4)
.long .LASF4 # DW_AT_name: "long double"
> Besides, there were many changes to guality tests on Linux/x86_64, both tests
> previously XPASSing now XFAIL again, as well as several new FAILs.
The guality tests are a little fragile, they also depend on the gdb version
installed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/98728] [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
2021-01-18 13:09 [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 13:10 ` [Bug debug/98728] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 14:33 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-19 7:36 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-19 21:06 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-20 9:53 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-19 7:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98728
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority|P3 |P1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/98728] [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
2021-01-18 13:09 [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-19 7:36 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-19 21:06 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-20 9:53 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: mark at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-19 21:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98728
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard <mark at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #1)
> Maybe this bug should be split in two (or three) for each specific FAIL?
>
> (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> > With the switch to DWARF-5, two debug tests have started to FAIL:
> > [...]
> > +FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2/dwarf-float.c scan-assembler 0x10.*DW_AT_byte_size
> >
> > 32-bit Solaris/x86 and Linux/x86_64
>
> So this fails in 32bit mode, but not in 64bit mode.
>
> In 64bit mode gcc generates:
>
> .uleb128 0x2 # (DIE (0x7d) DW_TAG_base_type)
> .byte 0x10 # DW_AT_byte_size
> # DW_AT_encoding (0x4)
> .long .LASF4 # DW_AT_name: "long double"
>
> But in 32bit mode it generates:
>
> .uleb128 0x2 # (DIE (0x6d) DW_TAG_base_type)
> .byte 0xc # DW_AT_byte_size
> # DW_AT_encoding (0x4)
> .long .LASF4 # DW_AT_name: "long double"
This part has been fixed by Jeff:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-January/563840.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug debug/98728] [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5
2021-01-18 13:09 [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-01-19 21:06 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-01-20 9:53 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: mark at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-01-20 9:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98728
Mark Wielaard <mark at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #3 from Mark Wielaard <mark at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Since the second issue was fixed lets close this and track the other issue in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98755
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-20 9:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-01-18 13:09 [Bug debug/98728] New: [11 regression] Several debug tests FAIL with DWARF-5 ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 13:10 ` [Bug debug/98728] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-18 14:33 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-19 7:36 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-19 21:06 ` mark at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-20 9:53 ` mark 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).