[Bug target/18987] New: [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[Bug target/18987] New: [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[schwab at suse dot de]

$ cat osdep.i  
static void do_date (char *);  
void rfc822_date (char *date)  
{  
  do_date (date);  
}  
$ gcc -c -O2 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -w osdep.i  
osdep.s: Assembler messages:  
osdep.s:19: Error: Epilogue count of 4294967296 exceeds number of nested  
prologues (0)  
  
This is due to an extra '.restore sp' before the tail call.  
  
	.file	"osdep.i"  
	.pred.safe_across_calls p1-p5,p16-p63  
	.text  
	.align 16  
	.global rfc822_date#  
	.proc rfc822_date#  
rfc822_date:  
	.prologue 2, 2  
	.mii  
	nop 0  
	.vframe r2  
	mov r2 = r12  
	.body  
	;;  
	.restore sp  
	mov r12 = r2  
	;;  
	.mfb  
	.restore sp  
	.prologue  
	alloc r2 = ar.pfs, 0, 0, 1, 0  
	nop 0  
	br.sptk.many do_date#  
	;;  
	break.f 0  
	;;  
	.endp rfc822_date#  
	.ident	"GCC: (GNU) 4.0.0 20041214 (experimental)"

-- 
           Summary: [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.0.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: wrong-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: ia64-*-linux


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[schwab at suse dot de]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.0.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-15 21:32 -------
Is this really the right test case?  Your output has line 19, but 
the test case only has 4 lines.  And I've done this: 
 
 
$ cat f.i 
static void do_date (char *); 
void rfc822_date (char *date) 
{ 
  do_date (date); 
} 
$ ./xgcc -S -B. -O2 -fno-omit-frame-pointer f.i -w 
$ ./xgcc -B. --version 
xgcc (GCC) 4.0.0 20041215 (experimental) 
Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc. 
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO 
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 
 
$ cat f.s 
        .file   "f.i" 
        .pred.safe_across_calls p1-p5,p16-p63 
        .text 
        .align 16 
        .global rfc822_date# 
        .proc rfc822_date# 
rfc822_date: 
        .prologue 2, 2 
        .mii 
        nop 0 
        .vframe r2 
        mov r2 = r12 
        .body 
        ;; 
        .restore sp 
        mov r12 = r2 
        ;; 
        .mfb 
        .restore sp 
        .prologue 
        alloc r2 = ar.pfs, 0, 0, 1, 0 
        nop 0 
        br.sptk.many do_date# 
        ;; 
        break.f 0 
        ;; 
        .endp rfc822_date# 
        .ident  "GCC: (GNU) 4.0.0 20041215 (experimental)" 
 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[schwab at suse dot de]

------- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de  2004-12-15 22:04 -------
osdep.s != osdep.i  

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-17 13:00 -------
Confirmed.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2004-12-17 13:00:17
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-18 13:18 -------
Alright, I'll try to find the patch that introduced this problem.  This 
is my prime suspect: 
 
2004-10-27  David Mosberger  <davidm@hpl.hp.com> 
            James E Wilson  <wilson@specifixinc.com> 
 
        PR target/13158 
        * config/ia64/ia64.c (ia64_expand_epilogue): Set RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P 
on 
        sibcall alloc instruction. 
        (process_set): Handle sibcall alloc instruction. 
 
 
 

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-18 13:30 -------
The patch I mentioned in comment #4 is indeed to blame for this new bug. 
 

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  BugsThisDependsOn|                            |13158


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-20 11:46 -------
Jim, David, can one of you look at this, and maybe revert the patch
for PR13158 because it causes this regression?

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |davidm at hpl dot hp dot
                   |                            |com, wilson at specifixinc
                   |                            |dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[davidm at hpl dot hp dot com]

------- Additional Comments From davidm at hpl dot hp dot com  2004-12-20 20:12 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> Jim, David, can one of you look at this, and maybe revert the patch
> for PR13158 because it causes this regression?

Reverting the patch doesn't sound like a good idea, because it will only replace
a noticable code-generation bug with a hard to notice one.

The real question is why anyone would use -fno-omit-frame-pointer on ia64.  That
sounds like a bug.  Is the code coming from pine?  If so, we should see about
getting that fixed.

In any case, I'll attach a patch that fixes the problem for the test-case.  Jim
is in a better position to say whether that's a reasonable way of solving the
problem.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org]

------- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org  2004-12-22 22:47 -------
according to http://bugs.debian.org/286840 (if that's the same thing), this is
broken in gcc-3.3 CVS and gcc-3.4 CVS as well. Latest known working version is
gcc-3.3.5.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |debian-gcc at lists dot
                   |                            |debian dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |critical
      Known to fail|                            |3.3.6 3.4.4 4.0.0
      Known to work|                            |3.3 3.4.0
            Summary|[4.0 regression] [ia64]     |[3.3/3.4/4.0 regression]
                   |Extra '.restore sp' in tail |[ia64] Extra '.restore sp'
                   |call                        |in tail call
   Target Milestone|4.0.0                       |3.4.4


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org]

------- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org  2004-12-22 23:13 -------
sorry, forgot to add that the 3.3 version I tested had H.J.Lu's unwind exception
handling patches applied, backported from the 3.4 branch. I'll recheck with a
vanilla gcc-3.3 CVS version.

    Matthias


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[wilson at specifixinc dot com]

------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com  2005-01-08 03:51 -------
Subject: Re:  [4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp'
	in tail call

On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 14:47, debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org
wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org  2004-12-22 22:47 -------
> according to http://bugs.debian.org/286840 (if that's the same thing), this is
> broken in gcc-3.3 CVS and gcc-3.4 CVS as well. Latest known working version is
> gcc-3.3.5.

The patch in question is PR 13158.  I added it to mainline, but did not
add it to gcc-3.4 CVS because technically it is not a regression, and
hence the rules do not seem to permit me to add it there without special
permission.  For gcc-3.3 CVS, I need the branch maintainer's permission,
and I did not get it, though I did not try very hard, so it isn't on the
gcc-3.3 CVS branch either.  Red Hat did add it to gcc-3_4-rhl-branch.

Someone probably added it to the debian gcc sources as a patch on top of
the FSF tree, so for gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4 this will have to be fixed on
the debian side by adding the patch in this PR also.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-08 03:55 -------
David's patch looks correct to me.  We only need this on mainline, as the
precursor patch (PR 13158) is only on mainline.  I will do a build and test and
then check it in if all goes well.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |wilson at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |dot org                     |org
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2004-12-17 13:00:17         |2005-01-08 03:55:56
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[gdr at integrable-solutions dot net]

------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2005-01-08 04:47 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

"wilson at specifixinc dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

| > according to http://bugs.debian.org/286840 (if that's the same thing), this is
| > broken in gcc-3.3 CVS and gcc-3.4 CVS as well. Latest known working version is
| > gcc-3.3.5.
| 
| The patch in question is PR 13158.  I added it to mainline, but did not
| add it to gcc-3.4 CVS because technically it is not a regression, and
| hence the rules do not seem to permit me to add it there without special
| permission.  For gcc-3.3 CVS, I need the branch maintainer's permission,
| and I did not get it, though I did not try very hard, so it isn't on the
| gcc-3.3 CVS branch either.  Red Hat did add it to gcc-3_4-rhl-branch.

I must have missed that patch then. 

| Someone probably added it to the debian gcc sources as a patch on top of
| the FSF tree, so for gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4 this will have to be fixed on
| the debian side by adding the patch in this PR also.

then, if it is 3.4.x it should go into 3.3.x too.

-- Gaby


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-11 03:44 -------
Subject: Bug 18987

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Changes by:	wilson@gcc.gnu.org	2005-01-11 03:44:12

Modified files:
	gcc            : ChangeLog 
	gcc/config/ia64: ia64.c 

Log message:
	Patch from David Mosberger to fix -fno-omit-frame-pointer bug.
	PR target/18987
	* config/ia64/ia64.c (process_set): For alloc insn, only call
	process_epilogue is !frame_pointer_needed.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=2.7085&r2=2.7086
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/ia64/ia64.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.341&r2=1.342



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[wilson at specifixinc dot com]

------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com  2005-01-11 04:06 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra
	'.restore sp' in tail call

On Fri, 2005-01-07 at 20:47, gdr at integrable-solutions dot net wrote:
> I must have missed that patch then. 

On second thought, I think I forgot to ask about it.  The patches aren't
in gcc-3.4 yet, but I just asked Mark for permission, and if he OKs it I
will add to both gcc-3.4 and gcc-3.3.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-11 07:07 -------
Fixed on mainline. 
 
Can the test case also be added to the test suite? 

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|3.3.6 3.4.4 4.0.0           |3.3.6 3.4.4
      Known to work|3.3 3.4.0                   |3.3 3.4.0 4.0.0
            Summary|[3.3/3.4/4.0 regression]    |[3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64]
                   |[ia64] Extra '.restore sp'  |Extra '.restore sp' in tail
                   |in tail call                |call


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[gdr at integrable-solutions dot net]

------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2005-01-11 19:46 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

"wilson at specifixinc dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

| Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] [ia64] Extra
| 	'.restore sp' in tail call
| 
| On Fri, 2005-01-07 at 20:47, gdr at integrable-solutions dot net wrote:
| > I must have missed that patch then. 
| 
| On second thought, I think I forgot to ask about it.  The patches aren't
| in gcc-3.4 yet, but I just asked Mark for permission, and if he OKs it I
| will add to both gcc-3.4 and gcc-3.3.

That is fine.

-- Gaby


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[wilson at tuliptree dot org]

------- Additional Comments From wilson at tuliptree dot org  2005-01-11 21:05 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore
	sp' in tail call

On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 23:07, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-11 07:07 -------
> Can the test case also be added to the test suite? 

Certainly.  I am working on that.  The usual ways of handling a testcase
don't seem to work for this one, and this situation is complicated
enough that I figured it would be easier to deal with the testcase
separately.




-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-13 05:57 -------
Subject: Bug 18987

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Branch: 	gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by:	wilson@gcc.gnu.org	2005-01-13 05:57:06

Modified files:
	gcc            : ChangeLog 
	gcc/config/ia64: ia64.c 

Log message:
	Patches to fix sibcall unwind info problems.
	PR target/18987
	* config/ia64/ia64.c (process_set): For alloc insn, only call
	process_epilogue is !frame_pointer_needed.
	PR target/13158
	* config/ia64/ia64.c (ia64_expand_epilogue): Set RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P on
	sibcall alloc instruction.
	(process_set): Handle sibcall alloc instruction.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=2.2326.2.767&r2=2.2326.2.768
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/ia64/ia64.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_4-branch&r1=1.265.2.16&r2=1.265.2.17



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-14 19:15 -------
Subject: Bug 18987

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Branch: 	gcc-3_3-branch
Changes by:	wilson@gcc.gnu.org	2005-01-14 19:15:41

Modified files:
	gcc            : ChangeLog 
	gcc/config/ia64: ia64.c 

Log message:
	Patches to fix sibcall unwind info bugs.
	PR target/18987
	* config/ia64/ia64.c (process_set): For alloc insn, only call
	process_epilogue is !frame_pointer_needed.
	PR target/13158
	* config/ia64/ia64.c (ia64_expand_epilogue): Set RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P on
	sibcall alloc instruction.
	(process_set): Handle sibcall alloc instruction.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_3-branch&r1=1.16114.2.1051&r2=1.16114.2.1052
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/config/ia64/ia64.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&only_with_tag=gcc-3_3-branch&r1=1.198.2.23&r2=1.198.2.24



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-14 19:45 -------
Subject: Bug 18987

CVSROOT:	/cvs/gcc
Module name:	gcc
Changes by:	wilson@gcc.gnu.org	2005-01-14 19:45:23

Modified files:
	gcc/testsuite  : ChangeLog 
Added files:
	gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/ia64: ia64.exp sibcall-unwind-1.c 
	                               sibcall-unwind-2.c 

Log message:
	Testcases for sibcall unwind info problems.
	PR target/13158
	* gcc.target/ia64/sibcall-unwind-1.c: New test.
	PR target/18987
	* gcc.target/ia64/sibcall-unwind-2.c: New test.

Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=1.4885&r2=1.4886
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/ia64/ia64.exp.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/ia64/sibcall-unwind-1.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/ia64/sibcall-unwind-2.c.diff?cvsroot=gcc&r1=NONE&r2=1.1



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
Bug 18987 depends on bug 13158, which changed state.

Bug 13158 Summary: [ia64] bad unwind info as a result of sibcall
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13158

           What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987

[Bug target/18987] [3.3/3.4 regression] [ia64] Extra '.restore sp' in tail call

[wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-01-14 19:52 -------
Fixed on mainline, gcc-3.4 branch, and gcc-3.3 branch.  Testcase added to mainline.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18987