From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id E3DD2389001F; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 19:08:13 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E3DD2389001F From: "bergner at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/100799] Stackoverflow in optimized code on PPC Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 19:08:13 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: bergner at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: everconfirmed bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 19:08:14 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100799 Peter Bergner changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2021-06-01 --- Comment #2 from Peter Bergner --- (In reply to Alexander Grund from comment #1) > Confirmed to also break with GCC 7.3, 8.2, 8.3 but works with 6.3, 6.4, 6= .5 The failure with GCC 7 and later coincides with the PPC port starting to default to LRA instead of reload. If I look at the debug dumps compiling dgebal.f, the 440 offset to the stack is created by an LRA spill. No probl= em there that I can see. The problem seems to come later when we generate the prologue/epilogue and we only update the stack pointer by the smaller 368 b= yte offset. Either LRA isn't telling us it needs that extra stack space or the ppc back= end didn't notice. I'll keep digging.=