[m-rev.] Re: for review: don't make asm label functions static

Ian MacLarty maclarty at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Thu Jul 8 13:22:33 AEST 2010


On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Ian MacLarty
<maclarty at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> On Thursday, July 8, 2010, Julien Fischer <juliensf at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Ian MacLarty wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Paul Bone <pbone at csse.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 12:17:33PM +1000, Ian MacLarty wrote:
>>
>> For review by anyone.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks Ian,
>>
>> Julien and I are happy with this.  Could you also bootcheck it using GCC 3.4?
>> We have gcc-3.4 installed on taura.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bootcheck with gcc-3.4 passes, so I've committed this.
>>
>>
>> rotd-2010-07-07 is very broken on x86-64 in the asm_fast.gc grades, (the
>> generated executables seg fault when initialising the standard library.)
>> This is presumably what PeterW mentioned yesterday afternoon.
>>
>> What optimization options did you bootcheck with?  It appears that
>> everything is fine at -O2, but the nightly builds are broken on the
>> following machines:
>>
>>         taura           gcc 4.4         -O5 --intermod-opt
>>         goliath         gcc 4.1         -O5 --intermod-opt
>>         neptune         gcc 4.1         -O4
>>         saturn          gcc 4.3         -O5 --intermod-opt
>>
>> The only one of the x86-64 machines on which it is working is goofy,
>> which builds at -O2 (it's also gcc 4.1).
>>
>
> I checked at the default (-O2 I believe) using gcc-4.3 and gcc-3.4 on
> a 32 bit machine.
>

I did a bootcheck on an x86_64 machine with gcc-4.3 and -O4 and it
passed.  However when I installed it and used the installed version to
build hello world, the executable segfaults.  I reverted my change and
reinstalled and still got a segfault.  Then I did a clean check out,
reverted my change and installed, and that worked.

I have reverted my change for now until we can figure out what's going on.

Is it the case that everything is statically linked when doing a
bootcheck?  If so then the problem seems to occur only when the
executable is dynamically linked with the Mercury libraries.

Ian.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-reviews at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-reviews at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-reviews-request at csse.unimelb.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



More information about the reviews mailing list