From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 70712 invoked by alias); 24 May 2017 11:04:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 70690 invoked by uid 89); 24 May 2017 11:04:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=23am, 23AM X-HELO: paperclip.tbsaunde.org Received: from tbsaunde.org (HELO paperclip.tbsaunde.org) (66.228.47.254) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 May 2017 11:04:19 +0000 Received: from ball (unknown [IPv6:2604:2000:8085:ad00:124a:7dff:fe34:eb17]) by paperclip.tbsaunde.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5F0DC088; Wed, 24 May 2017 11:04:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 11:21:00 -0000 From: Trevor Saunders To: Nathan Sidwell Cc: Bernd Edlinger , Richard Biener , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Jakub Jelinek , Jeff Law , Jason Merrill Subject: Re: [PATCH] Try harder to fix recently introduced crashes in ggc_collect Message-ID: <20170524110418.i5jbqqqlj5lltejr@ball> References: <381BC021-5087-40F5-B517-8EB0239900B2@suse.de> <1910af49-f2eb-60ce-68a8-52a5de4c0205@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1910af49-f2eb-60ce-68a8-52a5de4c0205@acm.org> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170306 (1.8.0) X-SW-Source: 2017-05/txt/msg01846.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:10:23AM -0400, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 05/19/2017 10:05 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > > > hwi cannot be the root cause of the problem, > > because it can only be long_integer_type_node > > or long_long_integer_type_node, otherwise > > an error would be triggered. > > that's the error I made with the static fns. PCH moves things around, so > anything that can be streamed via PCH must be GTY marked. Also, I'm not > sure if the current GC is a compacting GC (given PCH can compact things?) other than pch which I'm not sure about I'm pretty sure its not, and is just basic mark and sweep. That said if modules can get merged for gcc 8 I'm very tempted to rm pch now. Trev > > nathan > -- > Nathan Sidwell