On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:01 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> > So, what's the testcase testing then? Before the patch it doesn't ICE,
>>> > after the patch it doesn't ICE. What should I look out for so I can see
>>> > that what the testcase is producing without the patch is wrong?
>>>
>>> Before the patch, debug info is wrong since it uses hard frame pointer
>>> which isn't set up for the function. You can do "readelf -w" on .o file to
>>> verify the debug info.
>>
>> Yeah, that's what I thought as well, but it's correct:
>>
>> % ./gcc/cc1plus -quiet -O2 -g -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fvar-tracking x.cc
>> % gcc -c x.s
>> % readelf -wfi x.o
>> ...
>> <1><8a>: Abbrev Number: 9 (DW_TAG_subprogram)
>> <8b> DW_AT_specification: <0x3a>
>> <8f> DW_AT_decl_line : 6
>> <90> DW_AT_decl_column : 5
>> <91> DW_AT_object_pointer: <0xa7>
>> <95> DW_AT_low_pc : 0x0
>> <9d> DW_AT_high_pc : 0x3
>> <a5> DW_AT_frame_base : 1 byte block: 9c
>> (DW_OP_call_frame_cfa)
>> <a7> DW_AT_GNU_all_call_sites: 1
>> ...
>> <2><fe>: Abbrev Number: 11 (DW_TAG_formal_parameter)
>> <ff> DW_AT_name : d
>> <101> DW_AT_decl_file : 1
>> <102> DW_AT_decl_line : 6
>> <103> DW_AT_decl_column : 63
>> <104> DW_AT_type : <0x78>
>> <108> DW_AT_location : 2 byte block: 91 8 (DW_OP_fbreg: 8)
>> ...
>> DW_CFA_def_cfa: r7 (rsp) ofs 8
>> DW_CFA_offset: r16 (rip) at cfa-8
>> DW_CFA_nop
>> DW_CFA_nop
>> ...
>>
>> So, argument 'd' is supposed to be at DW_AT_frame_base + 8, which is
>> %rsp+8+8, aka %rsp+16, which is correct given that it's the eigth argument
>> (including the implicit this parameter).
>
> Can we use DW_AT_frame_base when the frame pointer isn't available?
> If yes,
>
> gcc_assert ((SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT
> && (elim == hard_frame_pointer_rtx
> || elim == stack_pointer_rtx))
> || elim == (frame_pointer_needed
> ? hard_frame_pointer_rtx
> : stack_pointer_rtx));
>
> should be changed to
>
> gcc_assert (elim == hard_frame_pointer_rtx
> || elim == stack_pointer_rtx);
>
> This will also fix:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86593
>
Since hard frame pointer is encoded with DW_OP_fbreg which uses the
DW_AT_frame_base attribute, not hard frame pointer directly, we should
allow hard frame pointer when generating DWARF info even if frame pointer
isn't used.
OK for trunk?
--
H.J.
From 6c16105e88c2635bd58fc904e7d28901a7f198f5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.to...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 08:01:33 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] DWARF: Allow hard frame pointer even if frame pointer isn't
used
r251028
commit cd557ff63f388ad27c376d0a225e74d3594a6f9d
Author: hjl <hjl@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4>
Date: Thu Aug 10 15:29:05 2017 +0000
i386: Don't use frame pointer without stack access
When there is no stack access, there is no need to use frame pointer
even if -fno-omit-frame-pointer is used and caller's frame pointer is
unchanged.
frame pointer may not be available even if -fno-omit-frame-pointer is
used. When this happened, arg pointer may be eliminated by hard frame
pointer. Since hard frame pointer is encoded with DW_OP_fbreg which
uses the DW_AT_frame_base attribute, not hard frame pointer directly,
we should allow hard frame pointer when generating DWARF info even if
frame pointer isn't used.
gcc/
PR debug/86593
* dwarf2out.c (based_loc_descr): Allow hard frame pointer even
if frame pointer isn't used.
(compute_frame_pointer_to_fb_displacement): Likewise.
gcc/testsuite/
PR debug/86593
* g++.dg/pr86593.C: New test.
---
gcc/dwarf2out.c | 25 ++++++++++++-------------
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr86593.C | 11 +++++++++++
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr86593.C
diff --git a/gcc/dwarf2out.c b/gcc/dwarf2out.c
index 77317ed2575..40cfdf56337 100644
--- a/gcc/dwarf2out.c
+++ b/gcc/dwarf2out.c
@@ -14325,13 +14325,13 @@ based_loc_descr (rtx reg, poly_int64 offset,
if (elim != reg)
{
+ /* Allow hard frame pointer here even if frame pointer
+ isn't used since hard frame pointer is encoded with
+ DW_OP_fbreg which uses the DW_AT_frame_base attribute,
+ not hard frame pointer directly. */
elim = strip_offset_and_add (elim, &offset);
- gcc_assert ((SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT
- && (elim == hard_frame_pointer_rtx
- || elim == stack_pointer_rtx))
- || elim == (frame_pointer_needed
- ? hard_frame_pointer_rtx
- : stack_pointer_rtx));
+ gcc_assert (elim == hard_frame_pointer_rtx
+ || elim == stack_pointer_rtx);
/* If drap register is used to align stack, use frame
pointer + offset to access stack variables. If stack
@@ -20512,14 +20512,13 @@ compute_frame_pointer_to_fb_displacement (poly_int64 offset)
in which to eliminate. This is because it's stack pointer isn't
directly accessible as a register within the ISA. To work around
this, assume that while we cannot provide a proper value for
- frame_pointer_fb_offset, we won't need one either. */
+ frame_pointer_fb_offset, we won't need one either. We can use
+ hard frame pointer in debug info even if frame pointer isn't used
+ since hard frame pointer in debug info is encoded with DW_OP_fbreg
+ which uses the DW_AT_frame_base attribute, not hard frame pointer
+ directly. */
frame_pointer_fb_offset_valid
- = ((SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT
- && (elim == hard_frame_pointer_rtx
- || elim == stack_pointer_rtx))
- || elim == (frame_pointer_needed
- ? hard_frame_pointer_rtx
- : stack_pointer_rtx));
+ = (elim == hard_frame_pointer_rtx || elim == stack_pointer_rtx);
}
/* Generate a DW_AT_name attribute given some string value to be included as
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr86593.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr86593.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..feed8c3743e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr86593.C
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// { dg-options "-O -g -fno-omit-frame-pointer" }
+
+struct Foo
+{
+ int bar(int a, int b, int c, int i1, int i2, int i3, int d);
+};
+
+int Foo::bar(int a, int b, int c, int i1, int i2, int i3, int d)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
--
2.17.1
