public inbox for libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jay <jay.krell@cornell.edu>
To: Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>,
	"<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
	"<libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>" <libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>,
	"<dje@gcc.gnu.org>" <dje@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, PowerPC] Fix PR57949 (ABI alignment issue)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 17:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1204BE32-130D-4F5A-AF7D-70C370855EDE@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1378904143.3730.46.camel@gnopaine>

Isn't mixing and matching and mismatching somewhat inevitable? Libffi & gcc don't always come along with each other? One must never change the ABI?

 - Jay

On Sep 11, 2013, at 5:55 AM, Bill Schmidt <wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2013-09-11 at 21:08 +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:32:01AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>> This fixes a long-standing problem with GCC's implementation of the
>>> PPC64 ELF ABI.  If a structure contains a member requiring 128-bit
>>> alignment, and that structure is passed as a parameter, the parameter
>>> currently receives only 64-bit alignment.  This is an error, and is
>>> incompatible with correct code generated by the IBM XL compilers.
>> 
>> This caused multiple failures in the libffi testsuite:
>> libffi.call/cls_align_longdouble.c
>> libffi.call/cls_align_longdouble_split.c
>> libffi.call/cls_align_longdouble_split2.c
>> libffi.call/nested_struct5.c
>> 
>> Fixed by making the same alignment adjustment in libffi to structures
>> passed by value.  Bill, I think your patch needs to go on all active
>> gcc branches as otherwise we'll need different versions of libffi for
>> the next gcc releases.
> 
> Hm, the libffi case is unfortunate. :(
> 
> The alternative is to leave libffi alone, and require code that calls
> these interfaces with "bad" structs passed by value to be built using
> -mcompat-align-parm, which was provided for such compatibility issues.
> Hopefully there is a small number of cases where this can happen, and
> this could be documented with libffi and gcc.  What do you think?
> 
> Thanks,
> Bill
> 
>> 
>> The following was bootstrapped and regression checked powerpc64-linux.
>> OK for mainline, and the 4.7 and 4.8 branches when/if Bill's patch
>> goes in there?
>> 
>>    * src/powerpc/ffi.c (ffi_prep_args64): Align FFI_TYPE_STRUCT.
>>    (ffi_closure_helper_LINUX64): Likewise.
>> 
>> Index: libffi/src/powerpc/ffi.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- libffi/src/powerpc/ffi.c    (revision 202428)
>> +++ libffi/src/powerpc/ffi.c    (working copy)
>> @@ -462,6 +462,7 @@ ffi_prep_args64 (extended_cif *ecif, unsigned long
>>     double **d;
>>   } p_argv;
>>   unsigned long gprvalue;
>> +  unsigned long align;
>> 
>>   stacktop.c = (char *) stack + bytes;
>>   gpr_base.ul = stacktop.ul - ASM_NEEDS_REGISTERS64 - NUM_GPR_ARG_REGISTERS64;
>> @@ -532,6 +533,10 @@ ffi_prep_args64 (extended_cif *ecif, unsigned long
>> #endif
>> 
>>    case FFI_TYPE_STRUCT:
>> +      align = (*ptr)->alignment;
>> +      if (align > 16)
>> +        align = 16;
>> +      next_arg.ul = ALIGN (next_arg.ul, align);
>>      words = ((*ptr)->size + 7) / 8;
>>      if (next_arg.ul >= gpr_base.ul && next_arg.ul + words > gpr_end.ul)
>>        {
>> @@ -1349,6 +1354,7 @@ ffi_closure_helper_LINUX64 (ffi_closure *closure,
>>   long i, avn;
>>   ffi_cif *cif;
>>   ffi_dblfl *end_pfr = pfr + NUM_FPR_ARG_REGISTERS64;
>> +  unsigned long align;
>> 
>>   cif = closure->cif;
>>   avalue = alloca (cif->nargs * sizeof (void *));
>> @@ -1399,6 +1405,10 @@ ffi_closure_helper_LINUX64 (ffi_closure *closure,
>>      break;
>> 
>>    case FFI_TYPE_STRUCT:
>> +      align = arg_types[i]->alignment;
>> +      if (align > 16)
>> +        align = 16;
>> +      pst = ALIGN (pst, align);
>> #ifndef __LITTLE_ENDIAN__
>>      /* Structures with size less than eight bytes are passed
>>         left-padded.  */
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-11 17:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1376494321.17852.17.camel@oc8801110288.ibm.com>
2013-09-11 11:38 ` Alan Modra
2013-09-11 11:55   ` Jakub Jelinek
2013-09-11 12:56   ` Bill Schmidt
2013-09-11 17:03     ` Jay [this message]
2013-09-12  2:11     ` Alan Modra
2013-09-12  8:33       ` Andrew Haley
2013-09-16 23:38         ` Alan Modra

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=1204BE32-130D-4F5A-AF7D-70C370855EDE@gmail.com \
    --to=jay.krell@cornell.edu \
    --cc=amodra@gmail.com \
    --cc=dje@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=libffi-discuss@sourceware.org \
    --cc=wschmidt@linux.vnet.ibm.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).