[Bug middle-end/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #26 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #25) This should be fixed on trunk for GCC 6. I'll keep this open for a few days to make sure there are no glaring complaints about the patch

[Bug middle-end/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #20 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- Hi all, Kyrill submitted a bug fix patch about 2 weeks ago. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01014.html I have tested his patch and found that the problem is clearly

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #17 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #16) I'm working on a patch btw. This bug is only shown in arm code so maybe the bug is in gcc/config/arm directory. I was trying to fix

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #13 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- Created attachment 35041 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35041action=edit backport patch from linaro Jongsung Kim (neidhard@lge.com) found a patch

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #12 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- (In reply to ktkachov from comment #11) Thinking about it again, there's no reason not to do sibcalls, it's just the code gets confused on how to shuffle the arguments around

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #8 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- (In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #6) (In reply to Honggyu Kim from comment #4) Can I add this testcase with your modification as my first gcc contribution

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||4.9.2

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #4 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- Dear Mikael Pettersson I also have a runtime testcase, which is different from dejagnu format. Can I add this testcase with your modification as my first gcc contribution? :) I

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #5 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- I just wrote foo function code separately to debug gcc more easily by compile only problematic code.

[Bug target/65358] parameter passing bug with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug target/65358] wrong parameter passing code with tail call optimization on arm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65358 --- Comment #2 from Honggyu Kim hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com --- Sorry, I miss typed the initial argument status for foo I will modified MEM[sp-4]: p.killer to MEM[sp+4]: p.killer as follows: r0: arg1 r1: arg2 r2: arg3 r3: p.fine MEM[sp

[Bug target/65358] New: parameter passing bug with tail call optimization on arm

Priority: P3 Component: target Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: hong.gyu.kim at lge dot com struct pack { int fine; int victim; int killer; }; int bar(int a, int b, struct pack p); int foo(int arg1, int arg2, int arg3, struct pack p