Quick top post: Krzysztof has re-opened llvm bugzilla 26519 because the
post-amble side of things has not been fixed yet. . .
Krzysztof Parzyszek changed bug 26519
What Removed Added
Status RESOLVED REOPENED
Resolution FIXED ---
Comment # 9 on bug 26519 from Krzysztof Parzyszek
The post-amble has not been fixed.
You are receiving this mail because:
• You reported the bug.
===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net
On 2016-Sep-10, at 6:23 PM, Mark Millard <markmi at dsl-only.net> wrote:
>
> On 2016-Sep-10, at 10:18 AM, Dimitry Andric <dim at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
>> On 06 Sep 2016, at 15:04, Mark Millard <markmi at dsl-only.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> llvm's bugzilla reports that the stack-handling SVR4 ABI violation for
>>> TARGET_ARCH=powerpc has been fixed r280705 (likely on trunk)!
>>
>> I merged the upstream fix to projects/clang390-import:
>>
>> https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/305686
>>
>> -Dimitry
>
> Looking at things for this again I've submitted a question to
> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=26519 asking if the post-amble code's
> side if things was also adjusted (instead of just the pre-amble/"claim" code
> side of things).
>
> [I'm not clang/llvm literate so I may have missed interpreted something when
> I looked.]
>
> My original submittal also noted the stack pointer adjustment-timing problem
> existed on the post-amble side in 3.8.0's code generation (when removing the
> frame from the stack):
>
>> 0x1801b8c <Buf_AddBytes+104>: lwz r30,24(r31)
>> 0x1801b90 <Buf_AddBytes+108>: lwz r29,20(r31)
>> 0x1801b94 <Buf_AddBytes+112>: lwz r28,16(r31)
>> 0x1801b98 <Buf_AddBytes+116>: lwz r27,12(r31)
>> 0x1801b9c <Buf_AddBytes+120>: lwz r26,8(r31)
>> 0x1801ba0 <Buf_AddBytes+124>: addi r1,r1,32 # Stack pointer
>> adjusted first
>> 0x1801ba4 <Buf_AddBytes+128>: lwz r0,4(r1)
>> 0x1801ba8 <Buf_AddBytes+132>: lwz r31,-4(r1) # Then Frame Pointer
>> load happens
>> # "outside" the new stack
>> range.
>> 0x1801bac <Buf_AddBytes+136>: mtlr r0
>> 0x1801bb0 <Buf_AddBytes+140>: blr
>
> If such code can still be generated there would still be a time frame needing
> a red-zone to protect stack the contents from signals.
>
> Hopefully I'm just wrong and this was fixed too.
>
>
>
> ===
> Mark Millard
> markmi at dsl-only.net
>
>
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
