------- Additional Comments From gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org  
2005-06-09 16:11 -------
Subject:  Segmentation fault while compiling ipw2100




------- Additional Comments From gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org  
2005-06-09 16:11 -------
Subject:  [4.0/4.1 Regression] Segmentation fault while compiling ipw2100


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-09 
13:51 -------
Reduced testcase:
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int func1(){}
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int func2() {return func1();}
extern inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int func1(){}
int func3(){return func2();}

I don't think this is valid code.

Note in the code I see the bodies for func1 (is_multicast_ether_addr).

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
  GCC build triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu           |
   GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu           |
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2005-06-09 13:51:14
               date|                            |
            Summary|Segmentation fault while    |[4.0/4.1 Regression]
                   |compiling ipw2100           |Segmentation fault while
                   |                            |compiling ipw2100
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.0.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21975

------- Additional Comments From gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org  
2005-06-09 16:11 -------
Subject:  Segmentation fault while compiling ipw2100


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-06-09 
13:35 -------
Before 4.0.0, we got an error (after replacing __builtin_offsetof):
pr21975.c:25417: redefinition of `is_multicast_ether_addr'
pr21975.c:24696: `is_multicast_ether_addr' previously defined here

reducing.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21975

Reply via email to