On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 1:11 PM H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 1:39 AM Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 11:44 PM H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > If we never generate function body, we shouldn't issue errors for return
> > > nor argument. Add init_cumulative_args_called to i386 machine_function
> > > to avoid issuing errors for return and argument without function body.
> > >
> > > gcc/
> > >
> > > PR target/99652
> > > * config/i386/i386.c (init_cumulative_args): Set
> > > init_cumulative_args_called to true.
> > > (construct_container): Issue error for return and argument only
> > > if init_cumulative_args_called is true.
> > > * config/i386/i386.h (machine_function): Add
> > > init_cumulative_args_called.
> > >
> > > gcc/testsuite/
> > >
> > > PR target/99652
> > > * gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-1.c: New test.
> > > * gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-2.c: Likewise.
> > > * gcc.target/i386/pr57655.c: Adjusted.
> > > * gcc.target/i386/pr59794-6.c: Likewise.
> > > * gcc.target/i386/pr70738-1.c: Likewise.
> > > * gcc.target/i386/pr96744-1.c: Likewise.
> > > ---
> > > gcc/config/i386/i386.c | 26 ++++++++++++++---------
> > > gcc/config/i386/i386.h | 3 +++
> > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-1.c | 8 +++++++
> > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-2.c | 8 +++++++
> > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr57655.c | 4 ++--
> > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr59794-6.c | 4 ++--
> > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr70738-1.c | 4 ++--
> > > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr96744-1.c | 4 ++--
> > > 8 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-1.c
> > > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr99652-2.c
> > >
> > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> > > index 540d4f44517..4a0b8c73bef 100644
> > > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> > > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> > > @@ -1705,6 +1705,8 @@ init_cumulative_args (CUMULATIVE_ARGS *cum, /*
> > > Argument info to initialize */
> > > struct cgraph_node *local_info_node = NULL;
> > > struct cgraph_node *target = NULL;
> > >
> > > + cfun->machine->init_cumulative_args_called = true;
> > > +
> > > memset (cum, 0, sizeof (*cum));
> > >
> > > if (fndecl)
> > > @@ -2534,18 +2536,21 @@ construct_container (machine_mode mode,
> > > machine_mode orig_mode,
> > > some less clueful developer tries to use floating-point anyway. */
> > > if (needed_sseregs && !TARGET_SSE)
> > > {
> > > - if (in_return)
> > > + if (cfun->machine->init_cumulative_args_called)
> >
> > Please make this an early return, with appropriate comment.
>
> Done.
>
> > > {
> > > - if (!issued_sse_ret_error)
> > > + if (in_return)
> > > {
> > > - error ("SSE register return with SSE disabled");
> > > - issued_sse_ret_error = true;
> > > + if (!issued_sse_ret_error)
> > > + {
> > > + error ("SSE register return with SSE disabled");
> > > + issued_sse_ret_error = true;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > + else if (!issued_sse_arg_error)
> > > + {
> > > + error ("SSE register argument with SSE disabled");
> > > + issued_sse_arg_error = true;
> > > }
> > > - }
> > > - else if (!issued_sse_arg_error)
> > > - {
> > > - error ("SSE register argument with SSE disabled");
> > > - issued_sse_arg_error = true;
> > > }
> > > return NULL;
> > > }
> > > @@ -2558,7 +2563,8 @@ construct_container (machine_mode mode,
> > > machine_mode orig_mode,
> > > || regclass[i] == X86_64_X87UP_CLASS
> > > || regclass[i] == X86_64_COMPLEX_X87_CLASS)
> > > {
> > > - if (!issued_x87_ret_error)
> > > + if (cfun->machine->init_cumulative_args_called
> > > + && !issued_x87_ret_error)
> >
> > Also, early return.
>
> Done.
>
> > > {
> > > error ("x87 register return with x87 disabled");
> > > issued_x87_ret_error = true;
> > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.h b/gcc/config/i386/i386.h
> > > index 48749104b24..ad908c010b3 100644
> > > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.h
> > > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.h
> > > @@ -2945,6 +2945,9 @@ struct GTY(()) machine_function {
> > > function. */
> > > BOOL_BITFIELD has_explicit_vzeroupper : 1;
> > >
> > > + /* If true if init_cumulative_args has been called. */
> > > + BOOL_BITFIELD init_cumulative_args_called: 1;
> >
> > I think that we should follow aarch64 lead and name it silent_p. The
> > comment also suits our needs.
> >
> > bool silent_p; /* True if we should act silently, rather than
> > raise an error for invalid calls. */
> >
>
> Done.
>
> Here is the v2 patch. OK for master?
BOOL_BITFIELD has_explicit_vzeroupper : 1;
+ /* If true if we should act silently, rather than raise an error for
True if we should ...
+ invalid calls. */
+ BOOL_BITFIELD silent_p : 1;
+
OK with the above comment fix.
Thanks,
Uros.
