public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2007-07-25 17:57 ` eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com
  2008-03-29 12:56 ` hutchinsonandy at aim dot com
                   ` (5 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com @ 2007-07-25 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #2 from eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com  2007-07-25 17:57 -------
The AVR test results for a 4.2.1 prerelease still shows failure on -O0 only:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-07/msg00335.html

However the results for a 4.3 snapshot shows failure on all -O settings:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-07/msg00603.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2007-07-25 17:57 ` [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com
@ 2008-03-29 12:56 ` hutchinsonandy at aim dot com
  2008-04-04 21:43 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hutchinsonandy at aim dot com @ 2008-03-29 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #3 from hutchinsonandy at aim dot com  2008-03-29 12:55 -------
Created an attachment (id=15396)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15396&action=view)
Patch to correct return_address

The attached patch fixes this problem and PR21078
The AVR target support for builtin_return_address only returned value of
frame_pointer+1 - so it would only be correct if stack and frame were empty.

The attached patch calculates the stack usage in the function prolog. This is
placed in symbol stack_usage using UNSPEC instruction pattern. Builtin Return
address uses RETURN_ADDR_RTX(count, tem) to add this to frame pointer to get to
correct address. This only supports level 0 (same function). Other levels (ie
upper functions) return 0  - which is correct response if not supported.
The address is that read from the stack - ie word address.

Testsuite torture/execute/20010122-1.c and PR17377.c both pass with this patch
applied.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2007-07-25 17:57 ` [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com
  2008-03-29 12:56 ` hutchinsonandy at aim dot com
@ 2008-04-04 21:43 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
  2009-10-31 15:28 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: eric dot weddington at atmel dot com @ 2008-04-04 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



-- 

eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2008-04-04 21:43:08
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2008-04-04 21:43 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
@ 2009-10-31 15:28 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2009-10-31 17:02 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-10-31 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #4 from hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-10-31 15:27 -------
*** Bug 21078 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 
Bug 21080 depends on bug 21078, which changed state.

Bug 21078 Summary: Testsuite reports excecution failure for gcc.c-torture/execute/20010122.c for some optimization levels
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21078

           What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |DUPLICATE

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2009-10-31 15:28 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-10-31 17:02 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2009-11-26 17:20 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-01-29 17:08 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-10-31 17:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #5 from hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-10-31 17:02 -------
Anatoly,

can we implement this patch to correct __builtin_return_address and thus remove
these old bug reports and associated testsuite failures? It also provides a
means to document stack usage which would seem useful.


-- 

hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |aesok at pautinka dot net


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2009-10-31 17:02 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-11-26 17:20 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-01-29 17:08 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-11-26 17:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #6 from hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-11-26 17:20 -------
Fixed on 4.5

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21078


-- 

hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

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


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
       [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
                   ` (5 preceding siblings ...)
  2009-11-26 17:20 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-01-29 17:08 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
  6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: eric dot weddington at atmel dot com @ 2010-01-29 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #7 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com  2010-01-29 17:08 -------
Setting Target Milestone.


-- 

eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.5.0


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case.
  2005-04-17 22:43 [Bug c/21080] New: " bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
@ 2005-04-17 22:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2005-04-17 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs


------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-04-17 22:47 -------
This looks like the same cause as PR 21078 since both use __builtin_return_address.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  BugsThisDependsOn|                            |21078
          Component|c                           |target


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21080


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-01-29 17:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <bug-21080-9887@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2007-07-25 17:57 ` [Bug target/21080] Excecution test failure for avr for pr17377 test case eweddington at cso dot atmel dot com
2008-03-29 12:56 ` hutchinsonandy at aim dot com
2008-04-04 21:43 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
2009-10-31 15:28 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-10-31 17:02 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-11-26 17:20 ` hutchinsonandy at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-01-29 17:08 ` eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
2005-04-17 22:43 [Bug c/21080] New: " bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-04-17 22:47 ` [Bug target/21080] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

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).