https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Known to work|7.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.3.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #21 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
I have increased stack size on Linux to 800MB, verified that ulimit -s reports
new value and run gcc again - it crashed again.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #20 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
gcc 8.2.0 does not crash on this code.
I tried to use sgcheck, but without luck - it exited on some assertion failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #19 from Martin Liška ---
> One more thing come to my mind. gcc should use stack limit of host, not of
> target. I saw crashes on both Cygwin and Linux hosts, which have stack size
> limits 2032 and 8192, respectively. If gcc uses def
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #18 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Unfortunately default Valgrind tool (memcheck) does not look for stack issues.
It has separate tool (sgcheck) which does this. I will try to use it too and
see if it will something.
One more thing come t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #17 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Daniel Fruzynski from comment #16)
> I checked it using Git Bash and got 2048.
As mentioned, I believe we would see a stack overflow in the valgrind log.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #16 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
I checked it using Git Bash and got 2048.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #15 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Daniel Fruzynski from comment #14)
> How to check default stack size? I found that ld has --stack option to set
> it, but I cannot find a way to check default. I tried to dump default linker
> sc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #14 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
How to check default stack size? I found that ld has --stack option to set it,
but I cannot find a way to check default. I tried to dump default linker script
using --verbose when linking, but there was n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #13 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #12)
> The valgrind log isn't very useful unless you configure GCC with
> --enable-valgrind-annotations
>
> The segfault might hint at stack exhaustion (at least I do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
The valgrind log isn't very useful unless you configure GCC with
--enable-valgrind-annotations
The segfault might hint at stack exhaustion (at least I don't see
a freed GC object being walked). What is th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Daniel Fruzynski from comment #10)
> If I recall correctly, I tried it on 8.2 or 8.3 crosscompiler too, and it
> worked there. However I am not sure if I used the same command to run it. I
> will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
If I recall correctly, I tried it on 8.2 or 8.3 crosscompiler too, and it
worked there. However I am not sure if I used the same command to run it. I
will check this later after I return home.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
@Daniel: Btw. do you know about a version of GCC that works fine with the
provided test-case?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Preprocessed source is in 1st attachment here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Created attachment 46356
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46356&action=edit
Valgrind log
Here is Valgrind log. It found multiple cases when uninitialized value vas
used. However in all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Created attachment 46355
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46355&action=edit
Source code which triggers crash
I added code which causes crash when compiling. Here is command which I use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
I was able to reproduce crash using MinGW crosscompiler build for CentOS 7,
configured in following way:
../gcc-7.4.0/configure --prefix=/root/gcc-7.4.0-mingw64
--build=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu --host=x86_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90471
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Fruzynski ---
Created attachment 46354
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46354&action=edit
MinGW package versions
25 matches
Mail list logo
