[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #61821] segfault using tree_parameter_list in oct file

[anonymous]

Follow-up Comment #12, bug #61821 (project octave):

Thanks! I downloaded the artifact and extracted it into the official installed
alpha version. Some of dependencies are different between the official and the
artifact so I placed the required libraries and I now can run octave but the
test case results in segfault.
I decided to compile ov-usr-fcn.cc manually. I used the command shell of the
official alpha version. The only used compiler options was -O2.
Two errors were generated:

-line 647  "Fwarning"  should be replaced by "octave::Fwarning"
-line 885  "set_internal_variable" should be replaced by
"octave::set_internal_variable"

After correcting the errors and compiling I inspected the disassembly of
"octave_user_function::define_ret_list". 


00001570
<__ZN20octave_user_function15define_ret_listEPN6octave19tree_parameter_listE>:
    1570:       8b 54 24 04             mov    0x4(%esp),%edx
    1574:       89 c8                   mov    %ecx,%eax
    1576:       89 91 c0 00 00 00       mov    %edx,0xc0(%ecx)
    157c:       c2 04 00                ret    $0x4
    157f:       90                      nop


It shows that the code is correctly generated and 0xc0 is generated instead of
0xd4.

Using the same shell I used ./configure and make to build Octave. Wonderfully
no compiler error was generated when building "ov-usr-fcn.cc". The disassembly
of "liboctave_value_la-ov-usr-fcn.o" shows that the code is wrongly
generated:


00001590
<__ZN20octave_user_function15define_ret_listEPN6octave19tree_parameter_listE>:
    1590:       8b 54 24 04             mov    0x4(%esp),%edx
    1594:       89 c8                   mov    %ecx,%eax
    1596:       89 91 d4 00 00 00       mov    %edx,0xd4(%ecx)
    159c:       c2 04 00                ret    $0x4
    159f:       90                      nop


I broke the make process and corrected "ov-usr-fcn.cc" and executed make again
but the generated code still is wrong. 
So it may be a configure/compiler option that forces gcc to generate wrong
code?!

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61821>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/