Bug 444996 - glibc cacoshl() miscompiled by gcc-4.3
Summary: glibc cacoshl() miscompiled by gcc-4.3
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: glibc
Version: 9
Hardware: powerpc
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jakub Jelinek
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: F9Target
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2008-05-02 16:59 UTC by Bill Nottingham
Modified: 2016-11-24 12:45 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2008-12-30 17:08:50 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

System ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
GNU Compiler Collection 36090 None None None Never

Description Bill Nottingham 2008-05-02 16:59:09 UTC
Description of problem:

See: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36090

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


Comment 1 Will Woods 2008-05-05 15:05:24 UTC
Should be fixed in glibc-2.8-3. Build available here:

Comment 2 Will Woods 2008-05-08 16:37:17 UTC
Can someone verify the fix, or give me a suggestion about how to verify it?

Comment 3 Jakub Jelinek 2008-05-08 16:51:32 UTC
It wasn't fixed, just worked around.  The real fix is being checked into GCC
today, so too late for F9.
Anyway, to verify cacoshl etc., just look for
in TESTING DETAILS in glibc 2.8-2 vs. 2.8-3 ppc64 build.log.
In 2.8-2 you will see a lot of errors, in 2.8-3 it isn't present (because the
test succeeded).
On ppc/ppc64 you need to ignore all the power6/ failures, because the lame koji
buildboxes don't have Altivec support, to get a clean testing you need to build
on Power6 or at least some Power box with Altivec ISA (e.g. G5).

Comment 4 Will Woods 2008-05-09 20:25:53 UTC
Thanks for the info, Jakub. Since we have a workaround in F9 I'm going to move
this off the blocker list.

I'm moving it to F9Target, under the assumption that the real fix will show up
as a F9 update.

Comment 5 Bug Zapper 2008-05-14 10:32:11 UTC
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA.
More information and reason for this action is here:

Comment 6 Ulrich Drepper 2008-12-30 17:08:50 UTC
The new gcc has long been deployed.  Closing.

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