public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Richard Earnshaw <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com>
Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
	"Richard Biener" <rguenther@suse.de>,
	"Jeff Law" <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
	"Alexandre Ferreira" <Alexandre.Ferreira@arm.com>,
	"Torbjörn SVENSSON" <torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] calls: Fix up TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P handling [PR107453]
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 18:25:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zd4bAR8cXrhlzRiK@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45ac2d54-21df-486c-a085-0a6c1f37a323@arm.com>

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:41:32PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > 2023-01-09  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>
> > 
> > 	PR target/107453
> > 	* calls.cc (expand_call): For calls with
> > 	TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P (funtype) use zero for n_named_args.
> > 	Formatting fix.
> 
> This one has been festering for a while; both Alexandre and Torbjorn have attempted to fix it recently, but I'm not sure either is really right...
> 
> On Arm this is causing all anonymous arguments to be passed on the stack,
> which is incorrect per the ABI.  On a target that uses
> 'pretend_outgoing_vararg_named', why is it correct to set n_named_args to
> zero?  Is it enough to guard both the statements you've added with
> !targetm.calls.pretend_outgoing_args_named?

I'm afraid I haven't heard of that target hook before.
All I was doing with that change was fixing a regression reported in the PR
for ppc64le/sparc/nvptx/loongarch at least.

The TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P functions (C23 fns like void foo (...) {})
have NULL type_arg_types, so the list_length (type_arg_types) isn't done for
it, but it should be handled as if it was non-NULL but list length was 0.

So, for the
  if (type_arg_types != 0)
    n_named_args
      = (list_length (type_arg_types)
         /* Count the struct value address, if it is passed as a parm.  */
         + structure_value_addr_parm);
  else if (TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P (funtype))
    n_named_args = 0;
  else
    /* If we know nothing, treat all args as named.  */
    n_named_args = num_actuals;
case, I think guarding it by any target hooks is wrong, although
I guess it should have been
    n_named_args = structure_value_addr_parm;
instead of
    n_named_args = 0;

For the second
  if (type_arg_types != 0
      && targetm.calls.strict_argument_naming (args_so_far))
    ;
  else if (type_arg_types != 0
           && ! targetm.calls.pretend_outgoing_varargs_named (args_so_far))
    /* Don't include the last named arg.  */
    --n_named_args;
  else if (TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P (funtype))
    n_named_args = 0;
  else
    /* Treat all args as named.  */
    n_named_args = num_actuals;
bet (but no testing done, don't even know which targets return what for
those hooks) we should treat those as if type_arg_types was non-NULL
with 0 elements in the list, except the --n_named_args doesn't make sense
because that would decrease it to -1.
So perhaps
  if ((type_arg_types != 0 || TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P (funtype))
      && targetm.calls.strict_argument_naming (args_so_far))
    ;
  else if (type_arg_types != 0
           && ! targetm.calls.pretend_outgoing_varargs_named (args_so_far))
    /* Don't include the last named arg.  */
    --n_named_args;
  else if (TYPE_NO_NAMED_ARGS_STDARG_P (funtype)
	   && ! targetm.calls.pretend_outgoing_varargs_named (args_so_far)))
    ;
  else
    /* Treat all args as named.  */
    n_named_args = num_actuals;

(or n_named_args = 0; instead of ; before the final else?  Dunno).
I guess we need some testsuite coverage for caller/callee ABI match of
struct S { char p[64]; };
struct S foo (...);

	Jakub


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-27 17:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-09 10:32 Jakub Jelinek
2023-01-09 11:58 ` Richard Biener
2024-02-27 16:41 ` Richard Earnshaw
2024-02-27 17:25   ` Richard Earnshaw
2024-02-27 17:25   ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2024-02-27 17:54     ` Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-28  8:31       ` Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-29 14:10     ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2024-02-29 14:14       ` Richard Earnshaw
2024-02-29 15:55         ` [PATCH] calls: Further fixes for " Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-29 17:23           ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2024-02-29 17:38             ` Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-29 17:51               ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2024-02-29 17:56                 ` Jakub Jelinek
2024-03-01 13:53                   ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2024-03-01 14:00                     ` Jakub Jelinek
2024-03-01 14:16           ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2024-03-01  4:53   ` [PATCH] calls: Fix up " Alexandre Oliva
2024-03-01  7:53     ` Jakub Jelinek

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=Zd4bAR8cXrhlzRiK@tucnak \
    --to=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=Alexandre.Ferreira@arm.com \
    --cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=rguenther@suse.de \
    --cc=torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com \
    /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).