From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 54953 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2018 15:59:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 54939 invoked by uid 89); 23 Feb 2018 15:59:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-26.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_0,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=minimization X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:59:05 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A59A72381; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:59:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-67.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.112.67]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F3F06090C; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:59:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH][committed] Fix ICE in maybe_record_trace_start To: Tom de Vries , gcc-patches References: <42ee114a-655b-8b46-f511-e423fc08af97@mentor.com> From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <2dab63f1-fe87-feda-11ec-65662e48e6bb@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:59:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <42ee114a-655b-8b46-f511-e423fc08af97@mentor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-02/txt/msg01330.txt.bz2 On 02/22/2018 03:59 AM, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 02/12/2018 07:32 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c >> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..0ca0b9f034b >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ >> +int foo; >> +typedef long unsigned int size_t; >> +typedef short unsigned int wchar_t; >> +struct tm >> +{ >> +  int tm_mday; >> +  int tm_mon; >> +  int tm_year; >> +}; >> +size_t >> +__strftime (wchar_t * s, size_t maxsize, const wchar_t * format, >> const struct tm *tim_p) >> +{ >> +  size_t count = 0; >> +  int len = 0; >> +  size_t i, ctloclen; >> +  unsigned long width; >> +  { >> +    if (foo) >> +      { >> +    { >> +      wchar_t *fmt = L"%s%.*d"; >> +      len = swprintf (&s[count], maxsize, fmt, "-", width, 0); >> +    } >> +    if ((count) >= maxsize) >> +      return 0; >> +      } >> +    else >> +      { >> +    len = >> +      swprintf (&s[count], maxsize - count, L"%.2d/%.2d/%.2d", 42, >> 99, 0); >> +    if ((count) >= maxsize) >> +      return 0; >> + >> +      } >> +  } >> +} > > Hi, > > when compiling this test for nvptx, the missing declaration for swprintf > results in this default declaration in the .s file based on the > arguments of the first call: > ... >         .extern .func (.param.u32 %value_out) swprintf (.param.u64 > %in_ar0, .param.u64 %in_ar1, .param.u64 %in_ar2, .param.u64 %in_ar3, > .param.u64 %in_ar4, .param.u32 %in_ar5); > ... > > and this error message when ptxas process the second call: > ... > ptxas regs-arg-size.o, line 97; error   : Type or alignment of argument > does not match formal parameter '%in_ar3' > ptxas regs-arg-size.o, line 97; error   : Type or alignment of argument > does not match formal parameter '%in_ar4' > ptxas fatal   : Ptx assembly aborted due to errors > nvptx-as: ptxas returned 255 exit status > ... > > When adding a declaration in the source like so: > ... > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c > index 0ca0b9f034b..81943a2c459 100644 > --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/regs-arg-size.c > @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ >  int foo; >  typedef long unsigned int size_t; >  typedef short unsigned int wchar_t; > +extern int swprintf(wchar_t *wcs, size_t maxlen, const wchar_t *format, > ...); >  struct tm >  { >    int tm_mday; > ... > > the declaration changes to: > ... > .extern .func (.param.u32 %value_out) swprintf (.param.u64 %in_ar0, > .param.u64 %in_ar1, .param.u64 %in_ar2, .param.u64 %in_ar3); > ... > and test test-case passes. > > Is it ok to update the test-case like this, or should it require > effective target 'untyped_assembly' (which is false for nvptx). It's OK to update the test in either way -- I don't think either change would compromise the test. Adding the prototype seems like the better choice to me. I need to remember that PTX (and the PA) are much more sensitive to these issues than any other port and once a testcase minimization is complete to go back and make sure we have suitable prototypes. jeff