public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "paul.groke at dynatrace dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/109665] New: Incorrect code generation for s390/s390x try-catch (__cxa_begin_catch), causing SIGSEGV Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:16:57 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-109665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109665 Bug ID: 109665 Summary: Incorrect code generation for s390/s390x try-catch (__cxa_begin_catch), causing SIGSEGV Product: gcc Version: 12.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: paul.groke at dynatrace dot com Target Milestone: --- In certain situations, GCC generates incorrect s390x code for calling `__cxa_begin_catch`. The bogus code contains a `lghi %r2,0` right before calling `__cxa_begin_catch`. r2 is the register for the first and only argument of `__cxa_begin_catch`, which is a pointer to some struct related to the exception. And when called with a nullptr, `__cxa_begin_catch` will crash (SIGSEGV). s390 (`-m31`) is also affected. To reproduce, compile the following on Linux/s390x with at least `-O1`: ``` void f2(int, int, int, int, int); void f1() { try { f2(42, 42, 42, 42, 0); // SIGSEGV } catch (...) { } } ``` The resulting code with GCC 12.2.0 is this: ``` f1(): stmg %r6,%r15,48(%r15) lghi %r5,42 aghi %r15,-160 lghi %r6,0 lghi %r4,42 lghi %r3,42 lghi %r2,42 brasl %r14,_Z2f2iiiii@PLT lg %r4,272(%r15) lmg %r6,%r15,208(%r15) br %r4 lghi %r2,0 brasl %r14,__cxa_begin_catch@PLT lmg %r6,%r15,208(%r15) jg __cxa_end_catch@PLT ``` See https://godbolt.org/z/TTYr63oM3 The correct code has an `lgr %r2,%r6` instead of the `lghi %r2,0`. The bug seems to be dependent on several factors: - The last thing in the try-catch is a function call with at least 5 parameters (Note that I only tested with parameter types that each fit into a general purpose register though) - The 5th argument must be a zero constant (0, false, ...) - The try-catch contains a "catch (...)" handler - At least `-O1` is used - The function call is not inlined/no constant propagation happens I found the bug with GCC 9.5.0 but it also happens with at least 11.2.0, 12.1.0 and 12.2.0 (tested with godbolt.org). I don't have newer GCC versions for s390x handy, so I didn't test with those.
next reply other threads:[~2023-04-28 10:16 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-04-28 10:16 paul.groke at dynatrace dot com [this message] 2023-04-28 11:43 ` [Bug target/109665] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-04-28 12:12 ` paul.groke at dynatrace dot com 2023-04-28 12:26 ` paul.groke at dynatrace dot com
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=bug-109665-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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: linkBe 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).