gcc 2.95/PPC bug
Albrecht Dre_
ad at mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
Fri Jan 21 18:03:47 EST 2000
When trying to find the cause for crashes of LAME, I think I found a
bug in the gcc. The code below (which is actually a simpilified excerpt
from LAME) will NOT pass the parameter `buggy' correctly to the
subroutine. Changing the number/type/sorting of the parameters will,
however, produce a working code in some cases. Some facts about the
system:
Machines: PowerMac 7300 (604e), LinuxPPC 2.2.11
PB "Lombard" (G3), LinuxPPC 2.2.12
gcc: versions 2.95 and 2.95.1
options: gcc -O0 -Wall gcc-2.95-ppc-bug.c -o gcc-2.95-ppc-bug
Is this a known (and hopefully already fixed ;-) bug, or should it go
directly to gcc-bugs at gcc.gnu.org?
Thanks, Albrecht.
---snip here:gcc-2.95-ppc-bug.c-----------------------------------------------
#include <stdio.h>
void vartest (double xr[2][2][576],
int l3_enc[2][2][576],
int var1, int var2, int var3, int var4, int var5, int var6,
int var7, int var8, int var9, double var10, int buggy)
{
printf ("%d %d %d %d %d %d %d %d %d %g %d\n",
var1, var2, var3, var4, var5, var6, var7, var8, var9, var10, buggy);
}
int main ()
{
double xxx [2][2][576];
int eee [2][2][576];
vartest (xxx, eee, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.1, 11);
return 0;
}
---end of bug demo code-------------------------------------------------------
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list