From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jan  5 16:40:48 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F10F7988;
 Sat,  5 Jan 2013 16:40:48 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from stefan@fafoe.narf.at)
Received: from fep19.mx.upcmail.net (fep19.mx.upcmail.net [62.179.121.39])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD9FF389;
 Sat,  5 Jan 2013 16:40:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from edge03.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.238]) by viefep19-int.chello.at
 (InterMail vM.8.01.05.05 201-2260-151-110-20120111) with ESMTP
 id <20130105164040.ZFCJ26940.viefep19-int.chello.at@edge03.upcmail.net>;
 Sat, 5 Jan 2013 17:40:40 +0100
Received: from mole.fafoe.narf.at ([80.109.55.137])
 by edge03.upcmail.net with edge
 id kGgf1k00p2xdvHc03GgfiG; Sat, 05 Jan 2013 17:40:40 +0100
X-SourceIP: 80.109.55.137
Received: by mole.fafoe.narf.at (Postfix, from userid 1001)
 id 96EB06D454; Sat,  5 Jan 2013 17:40:39 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 17:40:39 +0100
From: Stefan Farfeleder <stefanf@FreeBSD.org>
To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: clang 3.2 RC2 miscompiles libgcc?
Message-ID: <20130105164034.GA1436@mole.fafoe.narf.at>
References: <20121227150724.GA1431@mole.fafoe.narf.at>
 <50DC65F5.6060004@freebsd.org> <50E0BD66.4070609@FreeBSD.org>
 <20130102135950.GA1464@mole.fafoe.narf.at>
 <20130104154940.GD1430@mole.fafoe.narf.at>
 <20130104181438.GL82219@kib.kiev.ua>
 <20130104190602.GE1430@mole.fafoe.narf.at>
 <20130104202334.GN82219@kib.kiev.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130104202334.GN82219@kib.kiev.ua>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org>,
 Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2013 16:40:49 -0000

On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 10:23:34PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> 
> Thank you for digging more.
> 
> In fact, it is more likely that there is some bug or incompatibility in
> c++ unwinder than in the libgcc itself, but as you noted, a compiler bug
> is also possible.
> 
> Anyway, I was mostly looking could the backtrace starts in rtld. Rtld bug
> also cannot be excluded at this stage, but it not much likely.

FWIW, the diff between working and non-working assembler can be found at
http://people.freebsd.org/~stefanf/tmp/libgcc_s.s.diff .
Not that I expect much from that.

Stefan