On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:03:54AM -0700, Christopher Li wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 07:33:44AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > Segfault is new (which version?); the fscking mess in altivec is not, but > > it (a) doesn't depend on host sparse is ran on; (b) shouldn't lead to > > segfaults. Altivec extensions are undocumented and fortunately used only > > in one place in the tree. You should get sparse errors, but it shouldn't > > die on those. > > I think the segfault is likely to cause by my recent change in the parser. > > Dave, can you get a backtrace of the segfault? Even better if you can > give me a small test case which I can reproduce it on x86. I did battle with our ppc64 buildhost last night to try and coax it into giving me a coredump, no luck. And as I don't have gcc in that chroot, I couldn't build it natively. Given this is altivec stuff, I didn't try building it on x86. At which point I admitted defeat and turned in for the night ;) I'll see if I can force it into something buildable on x86 later, but first I'll see if I can get a useful shell on that buildhost that I can run gcc & gdb in. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
