X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4A5CE00F.70200@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:44:15 -0500
From: "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <yselkowitz AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090223 Thunderbird/3.0b2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: gcc4: ffmpeg vs. -freorder-functions
References: <4A5CB013 DOT 4050804 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A5CB69B DOT 2000106 AT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <4A5CB69B.2000106@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 14/07/2009 11:47, Dave Korn wrote:
>    ffmpeg is one thing that's likely to suffer from the COMMON alignment
> problem very badly, to the extent that I used it as a testcase when I
> developed the support for the new feature, and I have a nicely working version
> on my PC:
>
>    Without support for aligned common data it was falling down badly.

I did get that tidbit out of PR37216, to which you referred earlier. 
But the cases fixed by -fno-common so far (and when it rains, it pours; 
I've had a few more since) have all suffering from segfaults during 
execution, unlike ffmpeg where the initialization itself failed.

>    This isn't always an effective debugging technique; the -On settings don't
> actually strictly correspond to combinations of the -f flags, and even when
> you have tracked down an option that seems to make a difference, you don't
> know whether it's actually anything to do with the optimisation that you're
> tweaking, or some epiphenomenal side-effect.  In this case, I suspect the
> latter; changing the ordering of functions within the executable will have a
> knock on effect on the order with which other symbols get dragged into the
> link and the order in which commons are allocated, for example.

FWIW, I originally verified this with both -O1 
-feverything-except-reorder-functions and -O[23] -fno-reorder-functions.

>    I currently have three full gcc testruns going simultaneously and am short
> of CPU cycles, so it'll be a while before I can try it.  You could check if
> the problem is caused by unaligned variables by either 1) seeing if adding
> "-fno-common" to the CFLAGS fixes the broken executables,

I eliminated that as a solution earlier on.  (I did end up adding it 
once I re-enabled the usual features, as I was getting segfaults with 
WMA/WMV files, but not with MP3s, but that seems to be independent of 
this issue.)

>    Of course it could be an entirely new and interesting bug.  We'll see.

If you have a working version without this, it's very possible that has 
been fixed in the newer versions of binutils or gcc which you are 
running.  (I'm still running gcc-4.3.2-2 with binutils-2.19.51-1, but I 
had the bug with 20080624-2 as well.)


Yaakov

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple