From: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>
To: thomas.martitz@student.HTW-Berlin.de
Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Problems migrating to gcc 4.4.3&eabi - apparently a gcc bug
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B96A58B.6010503@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B96994D.40904@htw-berlin.de>
On 03/09/2010 06:54 PM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
> Am 09.03.2010 19:36, schrieb Andrew Haley:
>> That does not surprise me. I think you're seeing a problem that is
>> caused by something elsewhere in your program. I'm guessing that
>> there may be a bad prototype or somesuch.
>>
>> I think you need to strip down your sources until you find something.
>>
>> Maybe you should try -save-temps and have a look at the actual
>> preprocessd source. Maybe some bastard has done
>>
>> #define int long
>>
>> or something evil like that!
>>
>> Andrew.
>>
>
> No, I know our codebase pretty well. This is not the problem. Not that
> int or long matters, anyway.
>
> In the mean time we found a test case:
>
> ----
> void foo(int last, char * block);
>
> void bar(void)
> {
> struct {
> char * __attribute__((aligned(8))) member;
> } s;
>
> foo(0,s.member);
> }
> ----
>
> compiled with arm-elf-eabi-gcc -c test.c
>
> This example exposes the problem.
>
> We found the problem is related to struct addressing and the aligned
> attribute.
>
> - normal stack variables work
> - struct members work with __attribute__((aligned(4)))
> - struct members with __attribute__((aligned(X))) where X >= 8 *do not*
> work.
>
> Look at the assembly output for this very example. block is passed in
> r2, while it's supposed to be passed in r1.
>
> Our temporary "fix" is to make it "void foo(int last, volatile char *
> block);" [notice the volatile keyword] and it works as well (block
> passed in r1).
>
> This is definitely a gcc bug. The generated call is dependent on the
> parameter passed. The callee can't know about this. And it also happens
> with -O0.
Yeah, it's a bug. Mind you, it's pretty bizarre code: I'm not surprised
we never came across this before.
Why are you doing this, anyway? I would have expected
char __attribute__((aligned(8))) *member;
for a pointer to an 8-aligned buffer...
Andrew.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-09 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-09 16:31 Thomas Martitz
2010-03-09 16:42 ` Andrew Haley
2010-03-09 17:11 ` Thomas Martitz
2010-03-09 18:36 ` Andrew Haley
2010-03-09 18:54 ` Thomas Martitz
2010-03-09 19:11 ` Thomas Martitz
2010-03-09 19:39 ` John (Eljay) Love-Jensen
2010-03-09 19:44 ` Thomas Martitz
2010-03-09 19:46 ` Andrew Haley [this message]
2010-03-10 15:56 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2010-03-10 16:36 ` Thomas Martitz
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=4B96A58B.6010503@redhat.com \
--to=aph@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=thomas.martitz@student.HTW-Berlin.de \
/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: link
Be 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).