[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 Bill Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cyrilbur at gmail dot com --- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt --- *** Bug 65096 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code --- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- We've had some 15 days without any fallout noticed. Backporting this for GCC 5.2 now (or whenever it suits you) is pre-approved (even if it's not a regression).
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 Bug 65408 depends on bug 36043, which changed state. Bug 36043 Summary: gcc reads 8 bytes for a struct of size 6 which leads to sigsegv https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36043 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |5.2 --- Comment #10 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com --- Fixed for 5.2
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 --- Comment #9 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: amodra Date: Thu Apr 30 11:11:34 2015 New Revision: 222616 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222616root=gccview=rev Log: gcc/ PR target/65408 PR target/58744 PR middle-end/36043 * calls.c (load_register_parameters): Don't load past end of mem unless suitably aligned. gcc/testsuite/ * gcc.dg/pr65408.c: New. Added: branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr65408.c Modified: branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/ChangeLog branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/calls.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 --- Comment #7 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: amodra Date: Wed Apr 15 07:29:01 2015 New Revision: 222115 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222115root=gccview=rev Log: PR target/65408 PR target/58744 PR middle-end/36043 * calls.c (load_register_parameters): Don't load past end of mem unless suitably aligned. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr65408.c Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/calls.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 --- Comment #6 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com --- Code quality for both powerpc64le and x86_64 looks passable for the testcase here and other structs with at least one int field (ie. when the struct size is a multiple of 4, and alignment is 4). You get DImode loads followed by an SImode load if the struct isn't a multiple of 8 in size. Code quality does suffer a little for big-endian since any SImode load at the end of the struct needs to be shifted, whereas a DImode loading past the end of the struct needs no shifting. For cases where the struct size isn't a multiple of 4, code quality certainly does suffer, worst case being a struct of size 7 that would now be loaded by 7 byte loads.. Should we care more about that than a segfault in real-world user code? Hmm. Answering my own question, I guess that since pr36043 is nearly seven years old, we don't care too much about segfaults!
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Note that code quality is an issue here as well. Cases to consider are
struct test obj;
void foo()
{
func (obj);
}
and
void foo()
{
struct test obj;
func (obj);
}
and
void foo (struct test obj)
{
func (obj);
}
where we might (or might not) be sure that there is at least one 'int' mapped
after 'obj' (not for the global var case at least - but I'm less sure about
the other two cases (red zone? return address?))
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2015-03-14 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |amodra at gmail dot com Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com --- Created attachment 35032 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35032action=edit prototype patch Patch I'm about to test
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 --- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org --- ISTR there is an even older bug for this - PR36043.
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org --- shot in the dark here, but this wouldn't happen to be similar to: PR 65358 ?
[Bug target/65408] powerpc64 function argument passing may access invalid memory
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65408 Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #2 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com --- PR 65358 smells different to me, probably an arm backend bug. This one does look like it might have the same underlying problem as PR 58744, but I haven't analysed either bug so just a wild guess on my part..
