This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Correct thinko (DECL_RTL to DECL_RTL_SET_P) in function.c

> 1) GPC is a testcase.

Sure, but GPC is not (yet?) part of the FSF tree.

> Below is simple program that makes GPC crash. The crash is when making RTL
> for array `a1' (triggered by the DECL_RTL macro). IMHO GPC uses much more
> compilcated array declararions then other front ends (the code below is
> simple, but GPC have to be prepared for more complex cases), so probably it
> is not possible to reproduce the problem with other front end.
> { Compile using -W flag. }
> program String;
> function MemCompCase (const s1; Size: SizeType): Boolean;
> var
>   i: Integer;
>   a1: array [1 .. Size] of Char absolute s1;
> begin
>   MemCompCase := True
> end;
> begin
> end.
> The error message is:
>  MemCompCase
> string3.i: In function `MemCompCase':
> string3.i:8: internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:797
> Please submit a full bug report,
> with preprocessed source if appropriate.
> See <URL:> for instructions.

Yes, I didn't manage to reproduce it with an equivalent C testcase. I presume 
the 'absolute' stuff is necessary to make it crash?

> 3) IMHO the patch is appropriate for gcc-3.3 -- it fixes real problem
> for GPC and the chance of breaking something is very low. However if
> inclusion in gcc-3.3 is against the policy that is fine.

The patch looks reasonable to me, but without a testcase for the FSF 
testsuite it has nearly zero chance to go in 3.3.x.

> I developed the patch a year ago and as I wrote it is currently distributed
> with GPC (so in full install Pascal uses patched backend and other front
> ends use original backend). My objective here is to be able to build GPC
> with unpatched backend, and that probably will happen only with 3.4.

We are in stage3 for GCC 3.4, so a testcase could be required there too.

Mark, what do you think about the patch?

> By the way, the patch applies to 3.4 snapshots. I bootstraped both
> gcc-3.3.2 and gcc-3.4-20031015 (ada build in gcc-3.4-20031029 failed
> for me) on i386 and run the testsuite. I saw no new regressions (compared
> to unpatched build).


Eric Botcazou

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]