* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 12:34 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 13:04 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-05 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 12:34 ` [Bug libffi/60073] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 13:04 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 13:39 ` amodra at gmail dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-05 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Reverting the cls_double.ca change lets the testcase pass. Strangely, the
> cls_longdouble_va.c test still passes even with the patch, so this could
> indicate a bug in the libffi sparcv9 code.
Possibly, but modifying a testcase without explanation ("Import from upstream"
doesn't say anything about what has changed) is problematic.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 12:34 ` [Bug libffi/60073] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 13:04 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 13:39 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2014-02-05 16:29 ` [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: amodra at gmail dot com @ 2014-02-05 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |amodra at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
This is almost certainly a bug in sparc libffi. The explanation for the
testcase fix went to the upstream libffi list..
"This also fixes two faulty tests that used a non-variadic function
cast to call a variadic function, and spuriously reasoned that this is
somehow necessary for static functions."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-05 13:39 ` amodra at gmail dot com
@ 2014-02-05 16:29 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 16:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-05 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target|sparc*-sun-solaris2.* |sparc*-*-*
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2014-02-05
Host|sparc*-sun-solaris2.* |sparc*-*-*
Summary|[4.9 regression] 64-bit |[4.9 regression] 64-bit
|libffi.call/cls_double_va.c |libffi.call/cls_double_va.c
|FAILs on Solaris/SPARC |FAILs after recent
| |modification
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Build|sparc*-sun-solaris2.* |sparc*-*-*
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I can reproduce, probably not specific to Solaris.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-05 16:29 ` [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 16:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 18:17 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-05 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org |
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Investigating.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-05 16:30 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 18:17 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 21:08 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-05 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Btw, in the introduction section of the documentation, there is:
"Compilers for high level languages generate code that follow certain
conventions. These conventions are necessary, in part, for separate
compilation to work. One such convention is the "calling convention".
The calling convention is a set of assumptions made by the compiler
about where function arguments will be found on entry to a function. A
calling convention also specifies where the return value for a function
is found. The calling convention is also sometimes called the "ABI" or
"Application Binary Interface"."
The last sentence is slightly inaccurate, an ABI is much more than a calling
convention, it also specifies the layout of code and data among other things.
"The calling convention is part of what is called the..." would be more
correct.
And I think this should be "high-level languages" in the first sentence.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-05 18:17 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 21:08 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-05 22:57 ` amodra at gmail dot com
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-05 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It's a bad interaction between closures and variadic functions (and the other
test cls_longdouble_va.c passes by accident), which will require the SPARC-V9
code to define FFI_TARGET_SPECIFIC_VARIADIC. I'm a bit surprised that only ARM
and PowerPC define it at the moment.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-05 21:08 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-05 22:57 ` amodra at gmail dot com
2014-02-13 16:18 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: amodra at gmail dot com @ 2014-02-05 22:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #7 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> ---
The variadic support in libfii is fairly recent. And yes, it might have been
there earlier if the testcases actually tested what they were suppose to test!
Note that powerpc64-gcc passes fp arguments corresponding to the ellipsis part
of variadic functions in both the parameter save area and fp registers,
contrary to the ABI which says they just go in the parameter save area if the
function has a prototype. I think this was in part to satisfy libffi, where
without variadic support you don't know whether a function call is normal or
variadic and thus the powerpc libffi support had to pull fp values from fp
registers. So we broke gcc (a little) to satisfy libffi..
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-05 22:57 ` amodra at gmail dot com
@ 2014-02-13 16:18 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-13 16:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-17 12:00 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-13 16:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Thu Feb 13 16:18:13 2014
New Revision: 207763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207763&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libffi/60073
* src/sparc/ffitarget.h (FFI_TARGET_SPECIFIC_VARIADIC): Define.
(FFI_EXTRA_CIF_FIELDS): Likewise.
(FFI_NATIVE_RAW_API): Move around.
* src/sparc/ffi.c (ffi_prep_cif_machdep_core): New function from...
(ffi_prep_cif_machdep): ...here. Call ffi_prep_cif_machdep_core.
(ffi_prep_cif_machdep_var): New function.
(ffi_closure_sparc_inner_v9): Do not pass anonymous FP arguments in
FP registers.
* doc/libffi.texi (Introduction): Fix inaccuracy.
Modified:
trunk/libffi/ChangeLog
trunk/libffi/doc/libffi.texi
trunk/libffi/src/sparc/ffi.c
trunk/libffi/src/sparc/ffitarget.h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-13 16:18 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-13 16:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-02-17 12:00 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-13 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Thanks for reporting the problem.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* [Bug libffi/60073] [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs after recent modification
2014-02-05 12:33 [Bug libffi/60073] New: [4.9 regression] 64-bit libffi.call/cls_double_va.c FAILs on Solaris/SPARC ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-13 16:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-02-17 12:00 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-17 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60073
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Feb 17 12:00:04 2014
New Revision: 207822
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207822&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libffi/60073
* src/sparc/v8.S: Assemble only if !SPARC64.
* src/sparc/v9.S: Remove obsolete comment.
* src/sparc/ffitarget.h (enum ffi_abi): Add FFI_COMPAT_V9.
(V8_ABI_P): New macro.
(V9_ABI_P): Likewise.
(FFI_EXTRA_CIF_FIELDS): Define only if SPARC64.
* src/sparc/ffi.c (ffi_prep_args_v8): Compile only if !SPARC64.
(ffi_prep_args_v9): Compile only if SPARC64.
(ffi_prep_cif_machdep_core): Use V9_ABI_P predicate.
(ffi_prep_cif_machdep): Guard access to nfixedargs field.
(ffi_prep_cif_machdep_var): Likewise.
(ffi_v9_layout_struct): Compile only if SPARC64.
(ffi_call): Deal with FFI_V8PLUS and FFI_COMPAT_V9 and fix warnings.
(ffi_prep_closure_loc): Use V9_ABI_P and V8_ABI_P predicates.
(ffi_closure_sparc_inner_v8): Compile only if !SPARC64.
(ffi_closure_sparc_inner_v9): Compile only if SPARC64. Guard access
to nfixedargs field.
Modified:
trunk/libffi/ChangeLog
trunk/libffi/src/sparc/ffi.c
trunk/libffi/src/sparc/ffitarget.h
trunk/libffi/src/sparc/v8.S
trunk/libffi/src/sparc/v9.S
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread