Re: glibc regression on alpha with 2.34+
Hello!
On 12/13/22 10:33, Frank Scheiner wrote:
Hi guys,
On 13.12.22 06:15, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
[...]
I am still interested in fixing the glibc bug and will work on bisecting it.
I yestderday did give that a try on a DS15, but it took already hours to get glibc 2.33 compiled.
During this compilation I got 4 segfaults from the compiler (gcc-12) and a "gcc: internal compiler
error: Aborted signal terminated program cc1". If you are interested in the details, I have all the
error messages available.
Is that glibc from upstream or the Debian package?
Also, is the machine's memory known to be good? Please make sure to test it.
This went on during `make test` with another segfault and this one here after more than 2 hours of processing:
```
root@ds15:/srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33# time make test
[...]
g++ tst-thread_local1.cc -c -I/srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/ -g -O2 -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wundef -fmerge-all-constants -frounding-math -fno-stack-protector -mlong-double-128 -mieee -mfp-rounding-mode=d -std=gnu++11 -I../include -I/srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/nptl -I/srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33 -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/alpha/fpu -I../sysdeps/alpha/fpu -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/alpha -I../sysdeps/alpha/nptl -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/wordsize-64 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-64-128 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-opt -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/include -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux -I../sysdeps/nptl -I../sysdeps/pthread -I../sysdeps/gnu -I../sysdeps/unix/inet -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv -I../sysdeps/unix/alpha -I../sysdeps/unix -I../sysdeps/posix -I../sysdeps/alpha -I../sysdeps/wordsize-64 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-128 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32 -I../sysdeps/ieee754 -I../sysdeps/generic -I.. -I../libio -I. -D_LIBC_REENTRANT -include
/srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/libc-modules.h -DMODULE_NAME=testsuite -include ../include/libc-symbols.h -DTOP_NAMESPACE=glibc -o /srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/nptl/tst-thread_local1.o -MD -MP -MF /srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/nptl/tst-thread_local1.o.dt -MT /srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/nptl/tst-thread_local1.o
tst-thread_local1.cc: In function ‘int do_test()’:
tst-thread_local1.cc:177:5: error: variable ‘std::array<std::pair<const char*, std::function<void(void* (*)(void*))> >, 2> do_thread_X’ has initializer but incomplete type
177 | do_thread_X
| ^~~~~~~~~~~
tst-thread_local1.cc: At global scope:
tst-thread_local1.cc:133:1: warning: ‘void* thread_with_access(void*)’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
133 | thread_with_access (void *)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
tst-thread_local1.cc:127:1: warning: ‘void* thread_without_access(void*)’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
127 | thread_without_access (void *)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
make[2]: *** [../o-iterator.mk:9: /srv/storage/build/glibc-2.33/nptl/tst-thread_local1.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/srv/storage/glibc/nptl'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:479: nptl/tests] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/srv/storage/glibc'
make: *** [Makefile:9: check] Error 2
real 129m3.940s
user 104m25.441s
sys 11m36.611s
```
...after which I stopped. I did use `--disable-werror` during the configure step, but maybe this is not enough.
OTOH it's only a warning so why does it err? Ah, I see it `-Wundef` is set. I'll have a look what the buildds
use for the configure step.
Today I'll also give it another try, but with gcc-11 this time - just in case something is wrong with gcc-12
- but frankly I don't think this goes anywhere on the DS15:
Even with a DS25 I have available here I can only speed up the compilation and it takes already more than twice
the power of the DS15, so nothing gained. My ES45s are in cold storage and I don't dare to start them up in such
a low temperature environment.
Summarizing it, I'd be grateful if someone could do the bisecting on one of the buildds or developer machines.
You could cross-compile glibc. That's most likely what I am going to do.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer
`. `' Physicist
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Reply to: