On 2018-03-05 14:01:05 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2018-03-05 13:36:04 -0800, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2018-03-05 16:19:52 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Testing 0732ee73cf3ffd18d0f651376d69d4798d351ccc on Debian testing ... > > > > > > The build works out of the box with whatever the default system packages > > > are. > > > > > > Regression tests crash many times. One backtrace looks like this: > > > > > > #0 __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:51 > > > #1 0x00007fd5b1730231 in __GI_abort () at abort.c:79 > > > #2 0x000055c10a1555e3 in ExceptionalCondition > > > (conditionName=conditionName@entry=0x7fd5a245c2d8 > > > "!(LLVMGetIntrinsicID(fn))", > > > errorType=errorType@entry=0x7fd5a245bb1d "FailedAssertion", > > > fileName=fileName@entry=0x7fd5a245c294 "llvmjit_expr.c", > > > lineNumber=lineNumber@entry=193) at assert.c:54 > > > #3 0x00007fd5a245510f in get_LifetimeEnd (mod=mod@entry=0x55c10b1db670) > > > at llvmjit_expr.c:193 > > > #4 0x00007fd5a24553c8 in get_LifetimeEnd (mod=0x55c10b1db670) at > > > llvmjit_expr.c:233 > > > #5 BuildFunctionCall (context=context@entry=0x55c10b0ca340, > > > builder=builder@entry=0x55c10b225160, > > > mod=mod@entry=0x55c10b1db670, fcinfo=0x55c10b1a08b0, > > > v_fcinfo_isnull=v_fcinfo_isnull@entry=0x7ffc701f5c60) > > > at llvmjit_expr.c:244 > > > > Hm, that should be trivial to fix. Which version of llvm are you > > building against? There appear to be a lot of them in testing: > > https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=llvm+dev&searchon=names&suite=testing§ion=all > > On Debian unstable, I built against a wide variety of branches: > > for v in 3.9 4.0 5.0 6.0;do rm -f ../config.cache;CLANG="ccache clang-$v" > LLVM_CONFIG=/usr/lib/llvm-$v/bin/llvm-config ../config.sh --with-llvm && make > -j16 -s install && make -s check;done > > All of those pass. I'll create a testing chroot.
I did, and reproduced. Turned out I just missed the error in the above test. The bug was caused by one ifdef in get_LifetimeEnd() being wrong (function is is overloaded starting in 5 rather than 4). The comment above it even had it right... Greetings, Andres Freund
