public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/23775] [4.1 Regression] wrong code in argument passing
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2005 17:43:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050909174341.4359.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050908023129.23775.snyder@fnal.gov>


------- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-09-09 17:43 -------
The difference between 4.0 and HEAD is the expr.c hunk of
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg02021.html
If Paolo's reversion of that:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg00589.html
makes it in, the testcase will pass again.

The real problem is I think that when calls.c decides to save stack area
under an argument for the inner expand_call, but that argument partially overlaps
with the result of the call, we save/restore the argument with the inner
expand_call's argument mode and don't just limit to the actual bytes that
have already been initialized.  So we read some uninitialized bits from the
stack and overwrite with them the computed argument.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23775


  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-09-09 17:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-09-08  2:31 [Bug middle-end/23775] New: 4.1: " gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-08  5:52 ` [Bug target/23775] [4.1 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-08  9:08 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-08 12:46 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-08 16:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-09-09 17:43 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
     [not found] <bug-23775-702@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2005-10-16 21:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-10-16 21:51 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-10-17 19:02 ` pluto at agmk dot net
2005-10-22 21:57 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-10-31  5:42 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-11-03 21:00 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-11-04 10:55 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-11-04 22:56 ` steven at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-11-16 21:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050909174341.4359.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).