Bug 50642 – gcc breaks on && (address-of-label) operator

Bug 50642 - gcc breaks on && (address-of-label) operator

Summary:	gcc breaks on && (address-of-label) operator

Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG

Aliases:	None

Product:	Red Hat Linux
Classification:	Retired
Component:	gcc (Show other bugs)
Sub Component:
Version:	7.0
Hardware:	i386 Linux

Priority	low Severity high
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Assigned To:	Jakub Jelinek
QA Contact:	David Lawrence
Docs Contact:

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends On:
Blocks:
	Show dependency tree / graph

Reported:	2001-08-01 16:52 EDT by Mark Zealey
Modified:	2005-10-31 17:00 EST (History)
CC List:	0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:	2004-10-01 19:26:03 EDT
Type:	---
Regression:	---
Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---

Attachments	(Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Groups: None (edit)

Description Mark Zealey 2001-08-01 16:52:53 EDT

Description of Problem:gcc versions greater than 2.91.66 break on zealos (zealos.sourceforge.net, cvs module zealos-new) in i386/kern/desc.c:476


How Reproducible:Always. jump location seems to be non-random, but isn't correct either.


Steps to Reproduce:compile it with a non-kgcc gcc compiler and it will usially infinate-loop.
1. download zealos
2. compile with rh7.1's gcc
3. try to run it

Actual Results:it loops round infinatly printing it's messages (jumping to a psudo-random location in the binary)


Expected Results:it should preform a long jump to reload CS and EIP with the new GDT


Additional Information:Told to report it by arjan v

Comment 1 Richard Henderson 2004-10-01 19:26:03 EDT

zealos.sourceforge.net no longer exists, and I can wade through enough
dutch to find where the current code.

I do recall that a lot of folk had invalid source concerning label
addresses and computed gotos at the time.  I strongly suspect this
was one of those.

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