[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation
From: |
Sergey Korshunoff |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Nov 2015 15:40:06 +0300 |
> # Testing with Valgrind:
...
On i386, that recipe should detect the problem on 79_vla_continue.
Yes, I reproduced this result:
+==19621== Address 0xbe9e4f84 is just below the stack ptr. To
suppress, use: --workaround-gcc296-bugs=yes
PS: It looks that ld.so from glibc-2.8 have a problems
+==19621== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
+==19621== at 0x400A550: ??? (in /lib/ld-2.8.so)
+==19621== by 0x4003055: ??? (in /lib/ld-2.8.so)
+==19621== by 0x40128B9: ??? (in /lib/ld-2.8.so)
+==19621== by 0x40012CF: ??? (in /lib/ld-2.8.so)
+==19621== by 0x40009A6: ??? (in /lib/ld-2.8.so)
- [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Christian JULLIEN, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Edmund Grimley Evans, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Edmund Grimley Evans, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/10
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Edmund Grimley Evans, 2015/11/11
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/12
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation,
Sergey Korshunoff <=
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Edmund Grimley Evans, 2015/11/12
Re: [Tinycc-devel] RE :Re: VLA implementation, Sergey Korshunoff, 2015/11/10