Re: [Patch, GCC/ARM, gcc-5-branch] Fix PR68390 Incorrect code due to indirect tail call of varargs function with hard float ABI

2017-04-21 Thread Christophe Lyon 
On 13 April 2017 at 09:55, Ramana Radhakrishnan
 wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:55 PM, Christophe Lyon
>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It looks like we forgot to backport the fix for PR68390 to gcc-5-branch.
>> The patch applies cleanly, and fwiw we've had it in the linaro-5
>> branch for a while.
>>
>> OK to apply to gcc-5-branch?
>>
>
> OK if there are no regressions (the fact that its been in the linaro-5
> branch gives me some confidence about the backport).
>

Finally committed after bootstrap + no regression test on gcc-5-branch.

Thanks,

Christophe

> Ramana
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Christophe

Re: [Patch, GCC/ARM, gcc-5-branch] Fix PR68390 Incorrect code due to indirect tail call of varargs function with hard float ABI

2017-04-13 Thread Ramana Radhakrishnan 
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:55 PM, Christophe Lyon
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It looks like we forgot to backport the fix for PR68390 to gcc-5-branch.
> The patch applies cleanly, and fwiw we've had it in the linaro-5
> branch for a while.
>
> OK to apply to gcc-5-branch?
>

OK if there are no regressions (the fact that its been in the linaro-5
branch gives me some confidence about the backport).

Ramana

> Thanks,
>
> Christophe

[Patch, GCC/ARM, gcc-5-branch] Fix PR68390 Incorrect code due to indirect tail call of varargs function with hard float ABI

2017-04-12 Thread Christophe Lyon 
Hi,

It looks like we forgot to backport the fix for PR68390 to gcc-5-branch.
The patch applies cleanly, and fwiw we've had it in the linaro-5
branch for a while.

OK to apply to gcc-5-branch?

Thanks,

Christophe
2017-04-12  Christophe Lyon  

Backport from mainline
+2015-11-23  Kugan Vivekanandarajah  

gcc/
PR target/68390
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_function_ok_for_sibcall): Get function type
for indirect function call.

gcc/testsuite/
PR target/68390
* gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68390.c: New test.

Index: gcc/config/arm/arm.c
===
--- gcc/config/arm/arm.c(revision 246880)
+++ gcc/config/arm/arm.c(working copy)
@@ -6507,8 +6507,13 @@
 a VFP register but then need to transfer it to a core
 register.  */
   rtx a, b;
+  tree decl_or_type = decl;
 
-  a = arm_function_value (TREE_TYPE (exp), decl, false);
+  /* If it is an indirect function pointer, get the function type.  */
+  if (!decl)
+   decl_or_type = TREE_TYPE (TREE_TYPE (CALL_EXPR_FN (exp)));
+
+  a = arm_function_value (TREE_TYPE (exp), decl_or_type, false);
   b = arm_function_value (TREE_TYPE (DECL_RESULT (cfun->decl)),
  cfun->decl, false);
   if (!rtx_equal_p (a, b))
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68390.c
===
--- gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68390.c   (nonexistent)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/pr68390.c   (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+/* { dg-do run }  */
+/* { dg-options "-O2" } */
+
+__attribute__ ((noinline))
+double direct(int x, ...)
+{
+  return x*x;
+}
+
+__attribute__ ((noinline))
+double broken(double (*indirect)(int x, ...), int v)
+{
+  return indirect(v);
+}
+
+int main ()
+{
+  double d1, d2;
+  int i = 2;
+  d1 = broken (direct, i);
+  if (d1 != i*i)
+{
+  __builtin_abort ();
+}
+  return 0;
+}
+