summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/packages/gcc/6.4.0/0032-xtensa-fix-PR-target-65416.patch
blob: 14fd30f7f0bc6a4936dff90a9f366f8bdff763af (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
From fa0a207efdfca73fdcd1798789b7121e9e9ae90f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: jcmvbkbc <jcmvbkbc@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 18:26:07 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] xtensa: fix PR target/65416

The issue is caused by reordering of stack pointer update after stack
space allocation with instructions that write to the allocated stack
space. In windowed ABI register spill area for the previous call frame
is located just below the stack pointer and may be reloaded back into
the register file on movsp.
Implement allocate_stack pattern for windowed ABI configuration and
insert an instruction that prevents reordering of frame memory access
and stack pointer update.

gcc/
2018-06-19  Max Filippov  <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>

	* config/xtensa/xtensa.md (UNSPEC_FRAME_BLOCKAGE): New unspec
	constant.
	(allocate_stack, frame_blockage, *frame_blockage): New patterns.

git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk@261755 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4
Signed-off-by: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
---
 gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.md |   46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+)

--- a/gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.md
+++ b/gcc/config/xtensa/xtensa.md
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
   (UNSPEC_MEMW		11)
   (UNSPEC_LSETUP_START  12)
   (UNSPEC_LSETUP_END    13)
+  (UNSPEC_FRAME_BLOCKAGE 14)
 
   (UNSPECV_SET_FP	1)
   (UNSPECV_ENTRY	2)
@@ -1676,6 +1677,32 @@
 
 ;; Miscellaneous instructions.
 
+;; In windowed ABI stack pointer adjustment must happen before any access
+;; to the space allocated on stack is allowed, otherwise register spill
+;; area may be clobbered.  That's what frame blockage is supposed to enforce.
+
+(define_expand "allocate_stack"
+  [(set (match_operand 0 "nonimmed_operand")
+        (minus (reg A1_REG) (match_operand 1 "add_operand")))
+   (set (reg A1_REG)
+        (minus (reg A1_REG) (match_dup 1)))]
+  "TARGET_WINDOWED_ABI"
+{
+  if (CONST_INT_P (operands[1]))
+    {
+      rtx neg_op0 = GEN_INT (-INTVAL (operands[1]));
+      emit_insn (gen_addsi3 (stack_pointer_rtx, stack_pointer_rtx, neg_op0));
+    }
+  else
+    {
+      emit_insn (gen_subsi3 (stack_pointer_rtx, stack_pointer_rtx,
+			     operands[1]));
+    }
+  emit_move_insn (operands[0], virtual_stack_dynamic_rtx);
+  emit_insn (gen_frame_blockage ());
+  DONE;
+})
+
 (define_expand "prologue"
   [(const_int 0)]
   ""
@@ -1767,6 +1794,25 @@
   [(set_attr "length" "0")
    (set_attr "type" "nop")])
 
+;; Do not schedule instructions accessing memory before this point.
+
+(define_expand "frame_blockage"
+  [(set (match_dup 0)
+        (unspec:BLK [(match_dup 1)] UNSPEC_FRAME_BLOCKAGE))]
+  ""
+{
+  operands[0] = gen_rtx_MEM (BLKmode, gen_rtx_SCRATCH (Pmode));
+  MEM_VOLATILE_P (operands[0]) = 1;
+  operands[1] = stack_pointer_rtx;
+})
+
+(define_insn "*frame_blockage"
+  [(set (match_operand:BLK 0 "" "")
+        (unspec:BLK [(match_operand:SI 1 "" "")] UNSPEC_FRAME_BLOCKAGE))]
+  ""
+  ""
+  [(set_attr "length" "0")])
+
 (define_insn "trap"
   [(trap_if (const_int 1) (const_int 0))]
   ""