[Bug c/47438] New: function arguments memory alignment problem.

[Bug c/47438] New: function arguments memory alignment problem.

[dbms007 at hanmail dot net]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47438

           Summary: function arguments memory alignment problem.
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.1.2
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: critical
          Priority: P3
         Component: c
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: dbms007@hanmail.net


parameter memory aligment problem in 64 bit gcc compiler.

example ) 

int Test1(tranNo, name, path, sSpId, spId, spPg, type, size, parm)
long tranNo;
char* name, *path;
short sSpid, spId, spPg, type;
long size;
char* parm;
{
    printf("----------- size : %ld\n", size);
}

int Test2(tranNo, name, path, sSpId, spId, spPg, size, type, parm)
long tranNo;
char* name, *path;
short sSpid, spId, spPg;
long size;
short type;
char* parm;
{
    printf("----------- size : %ld\n", size);
}

main()
{
    int xx = 7974288;
    Test1(xx);
    Test2(xx);
}


compiler option 
gcc -O -m64 test.c

Above program u can see the different result output .
i think that some of passing parament causes memory alignment problem..

I like to know which version can solve that problem ?
please answer me asap ..

[Bug c/47438] function arguments memory alignment problem.

[dbms007 at hanmail dot net]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47438

--- Comment #1 from doh-hyun koh <dbms007 at hanmail dot net> 2011-01-24 17:02:45 UTC ---
hi I am developing big application with old large source in linux ..
even though I could manage some of bug, eventually the will be big troubles..
so I here I like to report the bugs and wait for your answer .. 
Please answer me asap ..

[Bug c/47438] function arguments memory alignment problem.

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47438

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|critical                    |normal

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-24 21:21:57 UTC ---
You are invoking undefined behavior here.
I cannot get your example to compile:
t.c: In function ‘Test1’:
t.c:4: error: declaration for parameter ‘sSpid’ but no such parameter
t.c:8: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function ‘printf’
t.c: In function ‘Test2’:
t.c:14: error: declaration for parameter ‘sSpid’ but no such parameter
t.c:19: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function
‘printf’

[Bug c/47438] function arguments memory alignment problem.

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47438

Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID

--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-25 10:50:00 UTC ---
And you are using a parameter that was not initialized (passed).

[Bug c/47438] function arguments memory alignment problem.

[dbms007 at hanmail dot net]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47438

--- Comment #4 from doh-hyun koh <dbms007 at hanmail dot net> 2011-01-25 11:28:51 UTC ---
#include <stdio.h>

int Test1(tranNo, name, path, sSpId, spId, spPg, type, size, parm)
long tranNo;
char* name, *path;
short sSpId, spId, spPg, type;
long size;
char* parm;
{
    printf("----------- size : %ld\n", size);
}


int Test2(tranNo, name, path, sSpId, spId, spPg, size, type, parm)
long tranNo;
char* name, *path;
short sSpId, spId, spPg;
long size;
short type;
char* parm;
{
    printf("----------- size : %ld\n", size);
}

main()
{
    int xx = 7974288;
    Test1(xx);
    Test2(xx);
}


compiler option 
gcc -O -m64 test.c

Would u please try again ?

[Bug c/47438] function arguments memory alignment problem.

[hp at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47438

Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |hp at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-02 03:25:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Would u please try again ?

I tried on my aging Fedora 12 installation (gcc-4.4.3-something) and somewhat
surprisingly the code compiled (outputting different numbers as expected), but
you'll see sufficient warnings with the options "-W -Wall" to put you on track.

You can't expect calls to different functions (different parameter types) to
behave the same like that, certainly not when passing the wrong number of
parameters as well as using parameters that "wasn't passed"!  An undefined
value is used, which is about as undefined as the one in the other function,
just not read as the same value.  Really, you can't even expect tranNo (the
first and single parameter actually passed) to be read as the same value when
you call functions that way (or any undefined way).
If you want to report a bug related to alignment of passed parameters, would
you please try again?  Start with real code from your application, make sure it
compiles without related warnings, open a new but report.