From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19117 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2013 16:43:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-ports-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-ports-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 19108 invoked by uid 89); 14 Nov 2013 16:43:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-la0-f41.google.com Received: from Unknown (HELO mail-la0-f41.google.com) (209.85.215.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:43:55 +0000 Received: by mail-la0-f41.google.com with SMTP id hp15so1832869lab.28 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:43:45 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.152.120.7 with SMTP id ky7mr246803lab.83.1384447425561; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:43:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.61.130 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:43:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <52840226.4010801@twiddle.net> From: Matt Turner Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:43:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Signal handling broken on alpha since glibc-2.16 To: Uros Bizjak Cc: Richard Henderson , libc-ports@sourceware.org, Mike Frysinger , Gentoo alpha AT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:18 AM, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: >>> On 11/04/2013 11:10 AM, Matt Turner wrote: >>>> A test from the gcc test suite shows that signal handling is broken on >>>> alpha since glibc-2.16. Bisecting before the glibc-ports merge is >>>> rather hard. >>>> >>>> See: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=480740 (includes test case) >>>> >>>> Off hand, do any changes between 2.15 and 2.16 seem to be likely >>>> candidates to cause this bug? >>> >>> It's likely to be change 7d1feb5693be7e606104cc2b6657c746a93e5926. >>> >>> Please try this. >> >> Looks like it works here. Thanks! >> >> RA = 0x120000c44, CFA = 0x11fc9e800 >> RA = 0x120000c78, CFA = 0x11fc9e810 >> RA = 0x200000b49d0, CFA = 0x11fc9e820 >> RA = 0x120000aac, CFA = 0x11fc9eb58 >> RA = 0x120000b38, CFA = 0x11fc9eb90 >> RA = 0x120000b58, CFA = 0x11fc9ec30 >> RA = 0x1200008e8, CFA = 0x11fc9ec40 >> RA = 0x2000009ad00, CFA = 0x11fc9ec50 >> Aborted > > The test should not abort. Did you compiled it with -fexceptions > -fnon-call-exceptions? Whoops. Compiling with the proper CFLAGS leads to better results: RA = 0x120000bdc, CFA = 0x11f8f8f00 RA = 0x120000c14, CFA = 0x11f8f8f00 RA = 0x120000c38, CFA = 0x11f8f8f10 RA = 0x120000c5c, CFA = 0x11f8f8f10 RA = 0x2000009e9d0, CFA = 0x11f8f8f20 RA = 0x120000aec, CFA = 0x11f8f9258 RA = 0x120000b84, CFA = 0x11f8f9280 RA = 0x120000d28, CFA = 0x11f8f9320 Thanks.