From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28363 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2015 11:12:21 -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 28302 invoked by uid 89); 18 Mar 2015 11:12:21 -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_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ob0-f178.google.com Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f178.google.com) (209.85.214.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:12:19 +0000 Received: by obcjt1 with SMTP id jt1so8866589obc.2 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 04:12:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.125.130 with SMTP id mq2mr56932335obb.52.1426677137811; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 04:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.98.137 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 04:12:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150318042208.GD24573@bubble.grove.modra.org> References: <20150314130238.GD16488@bubble.grove.modra.org> <55088069.3010802@redhat.com> <20150318042208.GD24573@bubble.grove.modra.org> Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Fix for PRs 36043, 58744 and 65408 From: Richard Biener To: Jeff Law , GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00913.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:22 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 01:28:41PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> On 03/14/2015 07:02 AM, Alan Modra wrote: >> > 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? > > Some (severity) background to PR65408. The bug came from SAP HANA > (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAP_HANA), a crash that happens on powerpc64 > and powerpc64le. aarch64 would also be susceptible to the crash since > it also loads 16 bytes for the 12-byte struct. x86_64 only loads 12 > bytes (i386.c:construct_container generates a parallel with a DImode > and SImode load). However the underlying bug is there and hits x86_64 > too for the pr58744 and pr36043 testcases.. It's a very very very old bug though. I'd be interested in any odd code-generation difference for compiling, say, the linux kernel (you _can_ get quite ugly code generated because of this fix). I'm leaning towards waiting for stage1 and then consider a backport to 5.1. I'm sure the HAHA guys can work-around by forcing an extra temporary on the stack and passing that. Richard. > -- > Alan Modra > Australia Development Lab, IBM