http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53708



--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 
2012-10-30 17:10:52 UTC ---

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, bergner at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:



> 

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53708

> 

> Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

> 

>            What    |Removed                     |Added

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>              Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED

>                  CC|                            |bergner at gcc dot gnu.org

>          Resolution|FIXED                       |

> 

> --- Comment #9 from Peter Bergner <bergner at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-10-30 
> 15:47:57 UTC ---

> Richard, I'm seeing this same bug in GCC 4.7 on powerpc64-linux when compiling

> GLIBC.  Is there a chance we can get your patch backported to 4.7?  I

> bootstrapped and regtested the backport with no regressions and can confirm it

> fixes the bug I'm running into, which can be seen with the reduced test case

> from glibc:

> 

> bergner@bns:~/gcc/BUGS> cat foo.i 

> static void (*const init_array []) (void)

>   __attribute__ ((section (".init_array"), aligned (sizeof (void *)), used))

> = { 0 };

> 

> bergner@bns:~/gcc/BUGS> /home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-4_7-base/gcc/xgcc

> -B/home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-4_7-base/gcc -S -m64 -O3 -maltivec foo.i -o

> bad.s

> 

> bergner@bns:~/gcc/BUGS> /home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-4_7-pr53708/gcc/xgcc

> -B/home/bergner/gcc/build/gcc-fsf-4_7-pr53708/gcc -S -m64 -O3 -maltivec foo.i

> -o good.s

> 

> bergner@bns:~/gcc/BUGS> diff -u bad.s good.s 

> --- bad.s    2012-10-30 10:41:15.000000000 -0500

> +++ good.s    2012-10-30 10:41:23.000000000 -0500

> @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@

>      .section    ".toc","aw"

>      .section    ".text"

>      .section    .init_array,"a"

> -    .align 4

> +    .align 3

>      .type    init_array, @object

>      .size    init_array, 8

>  init_array:

> 

> The above is bad, because the extra alignment causes the linker to add some

> null padding to the init_array and the loader isn't expecting that and ends up

> segv'ing.



Certainly - but can you check there wasn't a followup for fallout?

ISTR something here ...

Reply via email to