From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15668 invoked by alias); 22 Mar 2002 12:46:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15617 invoked by uid 71); 22 Mar 2002 12:46:05 -0000 Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 04:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020322124605.15612.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Anders Blomdell Subject: Re: optimization/6025: linux m68k-elf-gcc cross compiler segfault Reply-To: Anders Blomdell X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00838.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/6025; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Anders Blomdell To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, anders.blomdell@control.lth.se, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: optimization/6025: linux m68k-elf-gcc cross compiler segfault Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:39:49 +0100 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=6025 OK, I have looked a little furter into this. The problem seems to be in bb-reorder.c:415: next = (taken ? e_taken : e_fall)->dest; the segfault occurs when we get here with: taken = 0, e_taken = 842a0b0, e_fall = 0 (since (0 ? 842a0b0 : 0)->dest == (0)->dest, which is clearly illegal). Now, how do I do to find out why there is a block without a valid fall-through path (mapping *.ce2 dump to basic block layout is beyond my capacity). -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Anders Blomdell Department of Automatic Control Email: anders.blomdell@control.lth.se Lund Institute of Technology Phone: +46 46 222 4625 Box 118, S-221 00 Lund, Sweden Fax: +46 46 138118