This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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, ARM, ping1] Fix PR target/56846


On 26/11/14 17:23 -0000, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Ping?

I'm OK with backporting it if a release manager approves it.


-----Original Message-----
From: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 6:00 PM
To: Tony Wang; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; dan@debian.org; aph-
gcc@littlepinkcloud.com; Richard Earnshaw; Ramana Radhakrishnan;
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: RE: [Patch ARM] Fix PR target/56846

> From: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Tony Wang
>

>
> Hi all,
>
> The bug is reported at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56846, and itâs about the
> problem that
> when exception handler is involved in the function, then
> _Unwind_Backtrace function will run into deadloop on
> arm target.

The patch (in r215101) can be backported without any change on 4.8 and
4.9 branches. I checked in QEMU with and without the patch on both
branches and it indeed solves the problem.

Testsuite run without regression when compiled with arm-none-eabi
cross compiler and executed on QEMU emulating Cortex-M3.

I also bootstrapped gcc on x86_64-linux-gnu and run the testsuite
without
regressions.

Is it ok for backport?

Best regards,

Thomas










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