From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 47822 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2015 19:28:47 -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 47758 invoked by uid 89); 17 Mar 2015 19:28:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 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 (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 19:28:45 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2HJShkS027785 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:28:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-113-34.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.34]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2HJSggi029451 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:28:42 -0400 Message-ID: <55088069.3010802@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 19:28:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Fix for PRs 36043, 58744 and 65408 References: <20150314130238.GD16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> In-Reply-To: <20150314130238.GD16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00881.txt.bz2 On 03/14/2015 07:02 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > This is Richi's prototype patch in > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36043#c23 with fixes for > blocks larger than one reg, big-endian, and BLOCK_REG_PADDING. > I also removed the operand_subword_force since we may as well let > narrow_bit_field_mem in extract_bit_field do that for us. It is > necessary to do the BLOCK_REG_PADDING shift after we've loaded the > block or else repeat the bit-field extraction in that case. > > Bootstrapped and regression tested (-m32 and -m64) x86_64-linux and > powerpc64-linux. OK to apply? > > I'll also throw together a testcase or three. For execute tests I'm > thinking of using sbrk to locate an odd sized struct such that access > past the end segfaults, rather than mmap/munmap as was done in the > pr36043 testcase. Does that sound reasonable? > > PR target/65408 > PR target/58744 > PR middle-end/36043 > * calls.c (load_register_parameters): Don't load past end of > mem unless suitably aligned. I think this is probably a stage1 item. Richi, Jakub, Joseph, do any of you think we should try to push this into gcc-5? jeff