Bug 77590 - Internal compiler error in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:4325
Internal compiler error in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:4325
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: gcc (Show other bugs)
7.1
other Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jakub Jelinek
Brian Brock
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2002-11-09 17:02 EST by Kim Woodle
Modified: 2007-04-18 12:48 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2004-10-03 06:33:04 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)
C++ source (4.83 KB, text/plain)
2002-11-09 17:07 EST, Kim Woodle
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Kim Woodle 2002-11-09 17:02:30 EST
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD MS4.76 V20001206.2  (Win98; U)

Description of problem:
When compiling my code, I get the message
In file included from NvpEstim.C:14:
NvpEstim.H:137: Internal compiler error in tree_low_cst, at tree.c:4325

Please submit a full bug report.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/> for instructions.
gmake: *** [../build/ia32.linux.2.4.lib6/gcc296/cc-g/NvpEstim.o] Error 1

also
line NvpEstim.H:137 is the closing bracket }; at the end of a class definition
ID_EXEC=ia32.linux.2.4.lib6
gcc 2.96
Using Rogue Wave Source Pro 3.1


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


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.gmake install
2.
3.
	

Actual Results:  internal compiler error descibed above

Expected Results:  compilation of source code succeeds on SUN platform

Additional info:
Comment 1 Kim Woodle 2002-11-09 17:07:06 EST
Created attachment 84364 [details]
C++ source
Comment 2 Jakub Jelinek 2002-11-09 17:37:14 EST
This looks like http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-04/msg00738.html
Below is a quick backport of the patch, no testing other than it compiles
and fixes something similar to what I see in your header.
begin 644 gcc296-c++-big-struct.patch.bz2
M0EIH.3%!629362&37VL``F;?@'@P2?______W_J____Z8`9_>5G:W.LD0D``
M:`&(BCU&E/%-IDS4TF:AXIZGJ-I#Q1IIM0/TIZFCU&@;4`:IZGJGJ,AD`3$P
M``(8:3$8`````YHT:&F$`TP)IH`R&AB`-&(T,$9`!ID4TD](T:&@-`:`````
M```T&@YHT:&F$`TP)IH`R&AB`-&(T,$9`!(B$!&@)HI^(BCTS4T(:/2!IH`]
M09E-/49'I*%@;33$&YD"!ZVGLB(D)38HDB'*;!.@4DXMAS]V:90+%8/6!/P*
MW78\T7>U."0L,P/Y#O(#JTGDTD4G--B!>'.(H(&0,?2D-,32I"G3)E6!U?!F
M16%6R0JH%<-!`D+ITY\PE@YD""`06(`OV`4B019]<R*5523I`E)PE01!Q!Q4
MZ^'6A^1.S%V[-(;I,4J6=87B!ZZ="H<,$E5)@^&5\#MD!W&31H&EKU+ODR)X
M[2G"XC4D=-5U+G4P#@B#XG)I`P1NV%72<Q,**>*#4P'ANR(%-,(.B7`.>#R!
MF,\U(.@ID_L:*X-?Z?5J)YEDD$U[(GLJH&*+DLU"%R"8,D`EB0$!LR9='BB2
M2K"B2I?-A=HLNT-FWIDO*J)6-Z(NU#D@(Q'!T-9Q@SW3"V[5+S"*YE,AI@U^
M$K-*X+'.-S6KH\L<JWK#7;PM5UTVNUSAE;9<\IXZPU9T)6#UJ5F8$5[JYOU5
MN^;#D\,B`%]+$EXW"O^7Q*77HJ2,>#(Q$)(H3NZ+NTC/$)Y0L7*H8L"151=(
M-_T178@(/*$':H4$@,6.(QY1J;D@;-K@L&01LWZ5V)ALW[65N7Q0@F@DU<@V
MQCS,'&]+V,#@-PU]]6>%.79BQ73FO&P0)Q,-2!@(8CA%,3#(6.SX<#C\U.Y]
MKY"B$>FS1[N=L%OW7^K+49.Y9,AE@QU7S[ZAUNI<C0C/)MML;<Y/J6MWR(F;
MT30J0@(,M=`IBM&E3$!S8^+N2K5;0N6YA4,ZY$)YA`<D!%VSHXG_3BDG15@9
M4;R).!;EJT`EN,E`\Z.XCHU`=8$`8:Z'!\Z%!8,$-2\BSB0B=Q/X0HQ`N2PB
M1"/K&@K;W>L]N**&_[3@C8*3,O00EF:A%ZP#6&]&DE#8/[$2?\0,SH/W&T^Z
M4F)7^Q&*-H&>N^]+0=`HN!K\Z7K6FS)\!B6-%H\4U#('=1*'QBQ)F8(9BDJ"
M.GKJC/`^[?J<56RB4`,MA,PV?`#9M)RD-MB'\N9@>IS)P!"FQ<0);@`^YNMR
MPZG==K++,NRK_`71,P$@&KMZ`AF^U>7]K>G`00+*1AN,.BE0N'SY:Z%^I@;"
M_:UHF![1R)CF!OT)GM]BJB3_;+Z_H/<&R-`FP^\+%U-)Q)7!_IU0^6<GITBI
M>9(P-^$'8.4PE>'R:UM5_L5LPO</+;GPI&[9(H:XM@QC7?W/;]XV@TY_!L/,
M77W3_;I&W*ZODO[J8&-+,K$WY5Q=!D78F&Z9<.9B9F0&N,FLHJ/9C`C$L!"O
MKJ*8(S0O>[*?-=FSD/_MVXXJAKQW+MW^.]+:+BPO:O#/12O*QO6T+B#->_\C
MTZM,;#2"$ENFPTE5>0FR\(1KE(YF3T6RQ"%YWZ7+KZ)PZW]SH#*J@8IMKPNL
M6\];Y\DX([PNS.;,PZ"5%B/4S@H.OER1>`+Q/!>_Q.4]F7<=S/B8'%@=+)'P
M>?>+OP\%S*&_%*-;A\R)Y&<7VPML*5!U[*VI!$'3\)#)*78GJBUD6PSA7)T)
M4(H45I0RP7]?G9S&ZH[-%B++1;Y4@=RW8/77=$2&".77M@K0T_`JEOE`[;O-
MN.Q'(>OCH;]V%V0*^\Y?&$VY^@('A(6J9AO>ZE)SR#]]R"G*[`EYAW`G#-)@
M[E*F"S1:B"8),$L7#.2BQ9*=USN22[4DQ4[5?<&26IA@.!B&UX2C+\5T!TAN
M@LC!B(H<B<77^)^-078#U6:Q'Q"RQJG7C-G.^8M6IF6C;K!6:5T3?@K4,L+)
MI08N*T'/4:%56BM3@2!X#-[,T.UR!HDT$NP.=;-!N$OB*W7(R^/]WWU.IM-2
MU)CHP].54#V\E4WE3D&[U5%D!)5LD#[+MN[@\6H^%E4#!=@`N7T=YE,'_Q=R
(13A0D"&37VL`
`
end
Comment 3 Richard Henderson 2004-10-03 06:33:04 EDT
The provided test case does appear to be a large struct issue.
And Jakub's patch is in current releases.

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