Hi Tobias!
On 2022-10-24T16:07:25+0200, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 10:55:26AM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>> libgomp/nvptx: Prepare for reverse-offload callback handling
> Ok, thanks.
Per commit r13-3460-g131d18e928a3ea1ab2d3bf61aa92d68a8a254609
"libgomp/nvptx: Prepare for reverse-offload callback handling",
I'm seeing a lot of libgomp execution test regressions. Random
example, 'libgomp.c-c++-common/error-1.c':
[...]
GOMP_OFFLOAD_run: kernel main$_omp_fn$0: launch [(teams: 1), 1, 1]
[(lanes: 32), (threads: 8), 1]
Thread 1 "a.out" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00007ffff793b87d in GOMP_OFFLOAD_run (ord=<optimized out>,
tgt_fn=<optimized out>, tgt_vars=<optimized out>, args=<optimized out>) at
[...]/source-gcc/libgomp/plugin/plugin-nvptx.c:2127
2127 if (__atomic_load_n (&ptx_dev->rev_data->fn,
__ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) != 0)
(gdb) print ptx_dev
$1 = (struct ptx_device *) 0x6a55a0
(gdb) print ptx_dev->rev_data
$2 = (struct rev_offload *) 0xffffffff00000000
(gdb) print ptx_dev->rev_data->fn
Cannot access memory at address 0xffffffff00000000
Why is it even taking this 'if (reverse_offload)' code path, which isn't
applicable to this test case (as far as I understand)? (Well, the answer
is 'bool reverse_offload = ptx_dev->rev_data != NULL;', but why is that?)
Grüße
Thomas
-----------------
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634
München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas
Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht
München, HRB 106955
