Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Disable -faggressive-loop-optimizations in gcc 4.8+ for pre-9.2

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Disable -faggressive-loop-optimizations in gcc 4.8+ for pre-9.2
Date: 2015-01-20 16:15:01
Message-ID: 20150120161501.GB14804@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On 2015-01-20 11:10:53 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Disable -faggressive-loop-optimizations in gcc 4.8+ for pre-9.2 branches.
> >> With this optimization flag enabled, recent versions of gcc can generate
> >> incorrect code that assumes variable-length arrays (such as oidvector)
> >> are actually fixed-length because they're embedded in some larger struct.
> >> The known instance of this problem was fixed in 9.2 and up by commit
> >> 8137f2c32322c624e0431fac1621e8e9315202f9 and followon work, which hides
> >> actually-variable-length catalog fields from the compiler altogether.
> >> And we plan to gradually convert variable-length fields to official
> >> "flexible array member" notation over time, which should prevent this type
> >> of bug from reappearing as gcc gets smarter. We're not going to try to
> >> back-port those changes into older branches, though, so apply this
> >> band-aid instead.
> >
> > Would anybody object to me pushing this commit to branches 8.2 and 8.3?
>
> Since those branches are out of support, I am not sure what the point
> is. If we want people to be able to use those branches reasonably we
> need to back-port fixes for critical security and stability issues,
> not just this one thing.
>
> But maybe I am missing something.

Supporting and being able to compile and run 'make check' (which doesn't
complete >= gcc 4.8) aren't the same thing though. And we e.g. try to
provide pg_dump and libpq support for older versions, which is hard to
ensure if you can't run them.

I personally think that being able to at least compile/make check old
versions a bit longer is a good idea.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-01-20 16:18:17 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Disable -faggressive-loop-optimizations in gcc 4.8+ for pre-9.2
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-01-20 16:10:53 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Disable -faggressive-loop-optimizations in gcc 4.8+ for pre-9.2

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-01-20 16:18:17 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Disable -faggressive-loop-optimizations in gcc 4.8+ for pre-9.2
Previous Message Thom Brown 2015-01-20 16:13:57 Re: Parallel Seq Scan