Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
It's all about GCC 7.2
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mv
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 5702

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

drizzt wrote:
thunderbird (52.2.0) crash with oom during install phase: xpcshell is using more than 64gb of ram (32gb ram + 32gb swap) and is getting killed by oom.

The same issue as with firefox on processors with avx. I cannot find the bug in the moment, but there was a comment pointing out that the reason is that the xpcshell code relies on a lot of undefined behaviour which apparently just works by accident with a few gcc versions.

Edit: I found the Gentoo bug (I don't know why it didn't pop up with the keyword "firefox" before...). See comment #30.


Last edited by mv on Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 5702

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

drizzt wrote:
mv wrote:
drizzt wrote:
I don't expect this to be fixed soon, see comment#6

This comment is a year old. Moreover, nodejs has been fixed long ago; they just have to bump the bundled libs.

And after over a year this bug is still not fixed :wink:

This is not true: This bug has been fixed. Compilation with gcc-6 is not a problem anymore.
What I understand less is that they don't fix compilation with icu-59.1, because this is related with some security issues. Again, nodejs compiles already fine with icu-59.1. They should really bump.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
drizzt
Guru
Guru


Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 402

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mv wrote:
drizzt wrote:
mv wrote:
drizzt wrote:
I don't expect this to be fixed soon, see comment#6

This comment is a year old. Moreover, nodejs has been fixed long ago; they just have to bump the bundled libs.

And after over a year this bug is still not fixed :wink:

This is not true: This bug has been fixed. Compilation with gcc-6 is not a problem anymore.
What I understand less is that they don't fix compilation with icu-59.1, because this is related with some security issues.


The thread was only renamed since the bug does only occur with gcc-7.1. In my understanding (and experience that chromium compile still fails with the mentioned errors) there has been nothing done about it. :(

Here is the firefox bugtracker entry for xpcshell for reference: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1362771
_________________
People don't have to earn my respect. I offer my respect to them, but be careful to lose my respect...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5074
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Been using it since it was hardmasked. Ryzen <3 it.
A few packages didn't build but this is due to change in strictness and upstream packages provided patches
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 5702

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

drizzt wrote:
The thread was only renamed since the bug does only occur with gcc-7.1. In my understanding (and experience that chromium compile still fails with the mentioned errors)]

When the bug was reported, gcc-7.1 was not even out, and compilation failed with gcc-6. As I said, the bug has been fixed and chromium compiles fine with gcc-6.
The errors you see are similar, but not this bug. That the bug is used now for something else is a different story and does not mean that the original bug was not fixed.

BTW, a bugfix for the problem you see is here. But as I said, fixing this bug is not enough to compile chromium with gcc-7.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
drizzt
Guru
Guru


Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 402

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mv wrote:
drizzt wrote:
The thread was only renamed since the bug does only occur with gcc-7.1. In my understanding (and experience that chromium compile still fails with the mentioned errors)]

When the bug was reported, gcc-7.1 was not even out, and compilation failed with gcc-6. As I said, the bug has been fixed and chromium compiles fine with gcc-6.
The errors you see are similar, but not this bug. That the bug is used now for something else is a different story and does not mean that the original bug was not fixed.

BTW, a bugfix for the problem you see is here. But as I said, fixing this bug is not enough to compile chromium with gcc-7.


Sorry I have to disagree. I see two errors. The one mentioned in the chromium bugtracker:
Code:
In file included from ../../v8/src/heap/heap.h:22:0,
                 from ../../v8/src/isolate.h:23,
                 from ../../v8/src/assembler.h:42,
                 from ../../v8/src/code-stubs.h:9,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.cc:6:
../../v8/src/objects/hash-table.h: In member function ‘uint32_t v8::internal::HashTable<Derived, Shape, Key>::Hash(Key)’:
../../v8/src/objects/hash-table.h:144:46: warning: invalid use of incomplete type ‘class v8::internal::Heap’
       return Shape::SeededHash(key, GetHeap()->HashSeed());
                                              ^~
In file included from ../../v8/src/checks.h:8:0,
                 from ../../v8/src/elements-kind.h:9,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.h:11,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.cc:5:
../../v8/include/v8.h:142:7: note: forward declaration of ‘class v8::internal::Heap’
 class Heap;
       ^~~~
In file included from ../../v8/src/heap/heap.h:22:0,
                 from ../../v8/src/isolate.h:23,
                 from ../../v8/src/assembler.h:42,
                 from ../../v8/src/code-stubs.h:9,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.cc:6:
../../v8/src/objects/hash-table.h: In member function ‘uint32_t v8::internal::HashTable<Derived, Shape, Key>::HashForObject(Key, v8::internal::Object*)’:
../../v8/src/objects/hash-table.h:152:55: warning: invalid use of incomplete type ‘class v8::internal::Heap’
       return Shape::SeededHashForObject(key, GetHeap()->HashSeed(), object);
                                                       ^~
In file included from ../../v8/src/checks.h:8:0,
                 from ../../v8/src/elements-kind.h:9,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.h:11,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.cc:5:
../../v8/include/v8.h:142:7: note: forward declaration of ‘class v8::internal::Heap’
 class Heap;


and the one which you posted a patch for:
Code:
In file included from ../../v8/src/heap/objects-visiting.h:13:0,
                 from ../../v8/src/heap/object-stats.h:12,
                 from ../../v8/src/heap/heap-inl.h:16,
                 from ../../v8/src/objects-inl.h:25,
                 from ../../v8/src/x64/assembler-x64-inl.h:12,
                 from ../../v8/src/assembler-inl.h:13,
                 from ../../v8/src/macro-assembler.h:8,
                 from ../../v8/src/x64/codegen-x64.h:8,
                 from ../../v8/src/codegen.h:49,
                 from ../../v8/src/code-stubs.h:10,
                 from ../../v8/src/feedback-vector.cc:6:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h: In static member function ‘static void v8::internal::FixedBodyDescriptor<start_offset, end_offset, size>::IterateBody(v8::internal::HeapObject*, int)’:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:102:20: error: no matching function for call to ‘v8::internal::FixedBodyDescriptor<start_offset, end_offset, size>::IterateBody(v8::internal::HeapObject*&)’
     IterateBody(obj);
                    ^
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:84:22: note: candidate: template<int start_offset, int end_offset, int size> template<class ObjectVisitor> static void v8::internal::FixedBodyDescriptor<start_offset, end_offset, size>::IterateBody(v8::internal::HeapObject*, ObjectVisitor*)
   static inline void IterateBody(HeapObject* obj, ObjectVisitor* v) {
                      ^~~~~~~~~~~
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:84:22: note:   template argument deduction/substitution failed:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:102:20: note:   candidate expects 2 arguments, 1 provided
     IterateBody(obj);
                    ^
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:89:22: note: candidate: template<int start_offset, int end_offset, int size> template<class ObjectVisitor> static void v8::internal::FixedBodyDescriptor<start_offset, end_offset, size>::IterateBody(v8::internal::HeapObject*, int, ObjectVisitor*)
   static inline void IterateBody(HeapObject* obj, int object_size,
                      ^~~~~~~~~~~
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:89:22: note:   template argument deduction/substitution failed:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:102:20: note:   candidate expects 3 arguments, 1 provided
     IterateBody(obj);
                    ^
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:95:22: note: candidate: template<int start_offset, int end_offset, int size> template<class StaticVisitor> static void v8::internal::FixedBodyDescriptor<start_offset, end_offset, size>::IterateBody(v8::internal::HeapObject*)
   static inline void IterateBody(HeapObject* obj) {
                      ^~~~~~~~~~~
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:95:22: note:   template argument deduction/substitution failed:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:102:20: note:   couldn't deduce template parameter ‘StaticVisitor’
     IterateBody(obj);
                    ^
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:101:22: note: candidate: template<int start_offset, int end_offset, int size> template<class StaticVisitor> static void v8::internal::FixedBodyDescriptor<start_offset, end_offset, size>::IterateBody(v8::internal::HeapObject*, int)
   static inline void IterateBody(HeapObject* obj, int object_size) {
                      ^~~~~~~~~~~
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:101:22: note:   template argument deduction/substitution failed:
../../v8/src/objects-body-descriptors.h:102:20: note:   candidate expects 2 arguments, 1 provided
     IterateBody(obj);


But it needs to get fixed anyway upstream so let's not waste too much time on this :wink:
_________________
People don't have to earn my respect. I offer my respect to them, but be careful to lose my respect...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mv
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 5702

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

drizzt wrote:
I see two errors. The one mentioned in the chromium bugtracker:

These are only warnings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
drizzt
Guru
Guru


Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 402

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're right. My fault, I didn't fully read the output. :oops:
_________________
People don't have to earn my respect. I offer my respect to them, but be careful to lose my respect...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Perfect Gentleman
l33t
l33t


Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 641

PostPosted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i've migrated to GCC-7.2, glibc-2.26, binutils-2.29. All packages were built without problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jerry McBride
n00b
n00b


Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perfect Gentleman wrote:
i've migrated to GCC-7.2, glibc-2.26, binutils-2.29. All packages were built without problem.


I've upgraded to gcc-7.2.0 on my laptop. Wow! Such a painless rebuild. Had one package that failed, bumped up to the next version on ~x86 and n more problems. The source code will HAVE to catch up with this gcc.

First thing I noticed is that the putpur of this gcc is SMALLER. I do a lot of development/compiling on an old language. It's output goes through GCC. I am consistently seeing a 10% or better in executable size reduction. For me, smaller is much better.


Cant wait to see 7.3.0!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CaptainBlood
l33t
l33t


Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 818

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Irre wrote:
Error in app-emulation/xen-tools-4.8.1
Code:
xenlockprof.c: In function 'main':
xenlockprof.c:100:53: error: '%s' directive writing up to 39 bytes into a region of size between 17 and 37 [-Werror=format-overflow=]
             sprintf(name, "unknown type(%d) %d lock %s", data[j].type,
                                                     ^~
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:938:0,
                 from /var/tmp/portage/app-emulation/xen-tools-4.8.1/work/xen-4.8.1/tools/misc/../../tools/libxc/include/xenctrl.h:33,
                 from xenlockprof.c:13:
/usr/include/bits/stdio2.h:33:10: note: '__builtin___sprintf_chk' output between 24 and 83 bytes into a destination of size 60
   return __builtin___sprintf_chk (__s, __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL - 1,
          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       __bos (__s), __fmt, __va_arg_pack ());
       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

seems fixed with 4.8.1-r2 release when applying following patch: https://bugs.gentoo.org/634596
Thks 4 ur attention, interest & suopport
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum