[Bug target/11292] New: [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.

[Bug target/11292] New: [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.

[pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11292

           Summary: [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.
           Product: gcc
           Version: 3.4
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: wrong-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: powerpc-apple-darwin6.6

compile the following with -fnew-ra -foptimize-sibling-calls -O and see that it seg faults:
char * mystrcpy(char *dest, char *source)
{
  int len = strlen(source);
  return memmove(dest, source, len+1);
}

void main()
{
        char temp[10];
        char *t1="AA";
        mystrcpy(temp, t1);
}

Without -fnew-ra it does not seg fault.
This regression was introduced some time between  3.4 (20030602) and today.

[Bug target/11292] [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.

[pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11292



------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu  2003-06-23 14:46 -------
I sent the wrong example (here is the right one where it does not sib call in main):

char * mystrcpy(char *dest, char *source)
{
  int len = strlen(source);
  return memmove(dest, source, len+1);
}

int main()
{
        char temp[10];
        char *t1="AA";
        mystrcpy(temp, t1);
        return 0;
}

[Bug target/11292] [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.

[dhazeghi at yahoo dot com]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11292


dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
           Keywords|wrong-code                  |ice-on-valid-code
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2003-07-05 19:48:27
               date|                            |


------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com  2003-07-05 19:48 -------
Confirmed. As of 20030705, neither testcase even compiles:

foo.c: In function `mystrcpy':
foo.c:5: error: Abnormal edges for no purpose in bb 0
foo.c:5: internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed

[Bug target/11292] [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.

[pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11292


pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|ice-on-valid-code           |wrong-code


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu  2003-07-15 14:03 -------
It no longer ICEs one the mainline (20030714) but gcc still produces wrong code.

[Bug target/11292] [3.4 Regression] -fnew-ra causes sibcalling to go wrong.

[pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu]

PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11292


pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |critical
           Priority|P2                          |P1