------- Comment #5 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2007-10-03 20:10 ------- Subject: Re: optimization bug: wrong code with -fforce-addr
> ------- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2007-10-03 15:43 ------- > Please provide enough sources to create an _executable_ that shows the > failure. > We are dealing with runtime failure here. > If I could come up with a short testcase just like that, I would have done so already. > A _short_ testcase (<30 lines) is nice to have, so all non-related parts > should > be removed. Wandering through a maze of jumps certainly doesn't help to > find > the problem. > > An abort() should be called for wrong result, but at least wrong result > and > expected result should be described to help trace the issue down. > I will see what I can do, but do not expect any miracles. This is from a large software package with ~10^2 functions and at the end there is a binary output file of several MB which is either as it should or not :-( And as I told in the bug report, inserting or deleting code suddenly let the issue vanish. I already tried to reduce this code with the result that removing dead code fixed the miscompilation. > BTW: Assembler dumps are not _that_ informative, especially without > -fverbose-asm ;) > As it was not clear to me what information to provide, I asked first on the gcc mailing list, to no avail, so I provided just some random information. BTW 1: # gfortran -v Using built-in specs. Target: i386-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: /home/fx/gfortran_nightbuild/trunk/configure --prefix=/home/fx/gfortran_nightbuild/irun-20071001 --enable-languages=c,fortran --build=i386-pc-linux-gnu --enable-checking=release --with-gmp=/home/fx/gfortran_nightbuild/software Thread model: posix gcc version 4.3.0 20071001 (experimental) [trunk revision 128899] (GCC) BTW 2: Code was checked with valgrind and efence, seems to be ok. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33638
