disturbing g++ 971031 results. defer-pop to blame?

[Robert Lipe <robertl@dgii.com>]

> Jeff's dwarf2out.c patch applied.   Top level make bootstrap-lean
> to build it.
> 
> --target=i586-pc-sco3.2v5.0.4
> 
> For GCC, Both ELF and COFF fail minimally and identically.

Something screwy is going on here...


On the 1024 snapshot, g++ worked pretty well for both ELF and COFF.
I can't swear that I rebuilt the libraries on 1024, but I will swear
that I have this time.   I will also swear that I've done a top-level
make clean and make bootstrap-lean since applying Jeff's dwarf2out
patch.

I'm seeing different failures on g++ than I have before.  ELF and COFF
used to fail identically.  Since it's sort of wierd, I should confess
that ELF on this target uses dwarf2eh and COFF uses sjlj.

Here are the failures.  First ELF, then COFF.

FAIL: g++.benjamin/warn01.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.brendan/template9.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.jason/2371.C  Execution test
XPASS: g++.jason/destruct3.C - (test for bogus messages, line 38)
FAIL: g++.jason/template31.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.law/arg8.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.law/code-gen5.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.law/cvt2.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.law/profile1.C (test for excess errors)
XPASS: g++.mike/dyncast1.C  Execution test
XPASS: g++.mike/dyncast2.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/eh2.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/net34.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/net46.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/p658.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/p9732b.C  Execution test

                === g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            3367
# of unexpected failures        13
# of unexpected successes       3
# of expected failures          80
# of untested testcases         6
./negcs version egcs-2.90.15 971031 (gcc2-970802 experimental)


If I hand-compile and run, say, template.9.C, I see the "PASS" output
followed by an 'illegal instruction. Core dumped'.   Even if I modify
the assembly output for that file to just make main return, I get the
same.      I tried a couple of tests manually and got similar results.

$ ./negcs /tmp/net34.C -lstdc++
(robertl) rjlhome:/play/testgcc
$ ./a.out
bar_1::k -> 1
bar_2::k -> 2
bar_1::get_k() -> 1
bar_2::get_k() -> 2
Memory fault(coredump)

I get this with or without -fno-exceptions and with any -O from 0 to 3.

If I add '-defer-pop' to most of the cases I've tried by hand, it
seems to work.   In  fact, I just wrote a script to loop through those
cases and with -defer-pop.   With -defer-pop, 8 of them pass.   Without
-defer-pop, none of them pass.


Test Run By robertl on Sun Nov  2 13:11:08 1997
Native configuration is i586-pc-sco3.2v5.0.4
FAIL: g++.benjamin/warn01.C (test for excess errors)
XPASS: g++.jason/destruct3.C - (test for bogus messages, line 38)
FAIL: g++.jason/thunk2.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.law/profile1.C (test for excess errors)
XPASS: g++.mike/dyncast1.C  Execution test
XPASS: g++.mike/dyncast2.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/eh30.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.mike/init1.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/p2736.C  Execution test
FAIL: g++.mike/p4750.C (test for excess errors)

                === g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            3372
# of unexpected failures        7
# of unexpected successes       3
# of expected failures          81
# of untested testcases         6
./negcs version egcs-2.90.15 971031 (gcc2-970802 experimental)


The COFF test results are more consistent with what we've seen
to date on this target.   

Any ideas what's going on?

Thanx,
RJL