Looking through the bugzilla logs shows: Since it is a gcc_checking_assert that triggers the ICE, I assumed that does not affect a release build, is that correct?
So it would appear that the decision was taken that a backport was not needed.
Have I missed something? R. On 19/05/2021 13:22, Srinath Parvathaneni via Gcc-patches wrote:
Ping!!-----Original Message----- From: Srinath Parvathaneni <srinath.parvathan...@arm.com> Sent: 30 April 2021 16:24 To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Kyrylo Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com>; Richard Earnshaw <richard.earns...@arm.com> Subject: [GCC-10 backport][PATCH] arm: _Generic feature failing with ICE for -O0 (pr97205). Hi, This is a backport to GCC-10 to fix PR97205, patch applies cleanly on the branch. Regression tested and found no issues. Ok for GCC-10 backport? Regards, Srinath. This makes sure that stack allocated SSA_NAMEs are at least MODE_ALIGNED. Also increase the MEM_ALIGN for the corresponding rtl objects. gcc: 2020-11-03 Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> PR target/97205 * cfgexpand.c (align_local_variable): Make SSA_NAMEs at least MODE_ALIGNED. (expand_one_stack_var_at): Increase MEM_ALIGN for SSA_NAMEs. gcc/testsuite: 2020-11-03 Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> PR target/97205 * gcc.c-torture/compile/pr97205.c: New test. (cherry picked from commit 23ac7a009ecfeec3eab79136abed8aac9768b458) ############### Attachment also inlined for ease of reply ############### diff --git a/gcc/cfgexpand.c b/gcc/cfgexpand.c index bf4f194ed993134109cc21be9cb0ed8a5c170824..4fef5d6ebf420ce4d6f59606e cd064f45ae59065 100644 --- a/gcc/cfgexpand.c +++ b/gcc/cfgexpand.c @@ -366,7 +366,15 @@ align_local_variable (tree decl, bool really_expand) unsigned int align; if (TREE_CODE (decl) == SSA_NAME) - align = TYPE_ALIGN (TREE_TYPE (decl)); + { + tree type = TREE_TYPE (decl); + machine_mode mode = TYPE_MODE (type); + + align = TYPE_ALIGN (type); + if (mode != BLKmode + && align < GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (mode)) + align = GET_MODE_ALIGNMENT (mode); + } else { align = LOCAL_DECL_ALIGNMENT (decl); @@ -999,20 +1007,21 @@ expand_one_stack_var_at (tree decl, rtx base, unsigned base_align, x = plus_constant (Pmode, base, offset); x = gen_rtx_MEM (TREE_CODE (decl) == SSA_NAME ? TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (decl)) - : DECL_MODE (SSAVAR (decl)), x); + : DECL_MODE (decl), x); + + /* Set alignment we actually gave this decl if it isn't an SSA name. + If it is we generate stack slots only accidentally so it isn't as + important, we'll simply set the alignment directly on the MEM. */ + + if (base == virtual_stack_vars_rtx) + offset -= frame_phase; + align = known_alignment (offset); + align *= BITS_PER_UNIT; + if (align == 0 || align > base_align) + align = base_align; if (TREE_CODE (decl) != SSA_NAME) { - /* Set alignment we actually gave this decl if it isn't an SSA name. - If it is we generate stack slots only accidentally so it isn't as - important, we'll simply use the alignment that is already set. */ - if (base == virtual_stack_vars_rtx) - offset -= frame_phase; - align = known_alignment (offset); - align *= BITS_PER_UNIT; - if (align == 0 || align > base_align) - align = base_align; - /* One would think that we could assert that we're not decreasing alignment here, but (at least) the i386 port does exactly this via the MINIMUM_ALIGNMENT hook. */ @@ -1022,6 +1031,8 @@ expand_one_stack_var_at (tree decl, rtx base, unsigned base_align, } set_rtl (decl, x); + + set_mem_align (x, align); } class stack_vars_data @@ -1327,13 +1338,11 @@ expand_one_stack_var_1 (tree var) { tree type = TREE_TYPE (var); size = tree_to_poly_uint64 (TYPE_SIZE_UNIT (type)); - byte_align = TYPE_ALIGN_UNIT (type); } else - { - size = tree_to_poly_uint64 (DECL_SIZE_UNIT (var)); - byte_align = align_local_variable (var, true); - } + size = tree_to_poly_uint64 (DECL_SIZE_UNIT (var)); + + byte_align = align_local_variable (var, true); /* We handle highly aligned variables in expand_stack_vars. */ gcc_assert (byte_align * BITS_PER_UNIT <= MAX_SUPPORTED_STACK_ALIGNMENT); diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c- torture/compile/pr97205.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr97205.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6600011fcf84660edcba8d9 68c78ee6aaa0aa923 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/pr97205.c @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ +int a; +typedef __attribute__((aligned(2))) int x; int f () { + x b = a; + return b; +}
