Bug 165114 - ICE when rebuilding procps-3.2.5-6.3
Summary: ICE when rebuilding procps-3.2.5-6.3
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: gcc
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jakub Jelinek
QA Contact:
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2005-08-04 14:16 UTC by Karsten Hopp
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2005-08-10 15:41:28 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Preprocessed source (136.66 KB, text/plain)
2005-08-04 14:19 UTC, Karsten Hopp
no flags Details

Description Karsten Hopp 2005-08-04 14:16:12 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8b3) Gecko/20050729 Fedora/1.1-0.2.5.deerpark.alpha2 Firefox/1.0+

Description of problem:
proc/devname.c:52: warning: padding struct size to alignment boundary
proc/devname.c: In function 'link_name':
proc/devname.c:229: internal compiler error: in df_uses_record, at df.c:1061
Please submit a full bug report,

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:
Didn't try

Steps to Reproduce:
1.rebuild procps-3.2.5-6.3

Additional info:

Comment 1 Karsten Hopp 2005-08-04 14:19:00 UTC
Created attachment 117448 [details]
Preprocessed source

Comment 2 Jakub Jelinek 2005-08-09 20:37:59 UTC
Simplified testcase:
/* { dg-do compile } */
/* { dg-options "-O2 -fstack-protector-all -fweb" } */

struct S
  unsigned long long st_dev;
  unsigned long long st_rdev;
int st (const char *, struct S *);

foo (char *const buf, unsigned maj, unsigned min)
  struct S sbuf;
  if (st (buf, &sbuf) < 0)
    return 0;
  if (min !=
      (((unsigned) (sbuf.st_rdev) & 0xffu) |
       (((unsigned) (sbuf.st_rdev) & 0xfff00000u) >> 12u)))
    return 0;
  if (maj != (((unsigned) (sbuf.st_rdev) >> 8u) & 0xfffu))
    return 0;
  return 1;

Now, why are you using -fweb?  See
for details why it is not a good idea to use it.

Comment 3 Karsten Hopp 2005-08-10 10:43:30 UTC
I'm just the one who found it during a mass rebuild. 
I'll add kzak to CC: for a comment about -fweb 

Comment 4 Karel Zak 2005-08-10 14:48:01 UTC
Thanks for info. I will remove -fweb from procps CFLAGS.

Comment 5 Jakub Jelinek 2005-08-10 15:41:28 UTC
The problem doesn't seem to be reproducible on GCC HEAD, so I guess I'll just
WONTFIX this.  -fweb simply shouldn't be used, it is certainly not very well

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.