This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

PING: PATCH: PR middle-end/45234: [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE in expand_call, at calls.c:2845 when passing aligned function argument from unaligned stack after alloca


On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:09 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:35 AM, H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> All variable sized adjustments must be multiple of preferred stack
>> boundary. ?Stack alignment may change preferred stack boundary after
>> variable sized adjustments have been made. ?We need to compensate it.
>> OK if it passes regresion test on Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> H.J.
>> ---
>> gcc/
>>
>> 2010-08-10 ?H.J. Lu ?<hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>>
>> ? ? ? ?PR middle-end/45234
>> ? ? ? ?* calls.c (expand_call): Make sure that all variable sized
>> ? ? ? ?adjustments are multiple of preferred stack boundary after
>> ? ? ? ?stack alignment.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/
>>
>> 2010-08-10 ?H.J. Lu ?<hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>>
>> ? ? ? ?PR middle-end/45234
>> ? ? ? ?* gcc.dg/torture/stackalign/alloca-5.c: New.
>>
>
> It has no regressions on Linux/ia32 and Linux/x86-64? OK for
> trunk?
>

PING 1

-- 
H.J.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]