https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100897
Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2021-06-11
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=94794,
| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=95137
--- Comment #1 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
for symmetric transfer to work without stack overflow, it relies on an indirect
tailcall.
For some GCC targets indirect tail-calls are not available without some
additional support (see PR94794).
I tried to reproduce this (with a test case I use regularly for this) on a
target that normally completes symmetric transfers successfully when the
optimisation level is > 1. (x86_64, darwin).
The fail also occurs with my regular test case with -fsanitize=address - so, it
seems that the inclusion of the address sanitiser is preventing or interfering
with the tailcall. Note that there are also other known issues with coroutines
and the sanitizers (PR95137).
