Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 13 Jan 2011 22:28:48 +0200
From:      Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: What does the FreeBSD/i386 ABI say about stack alignment?
Message-ID:  <20110113202848.GI2518@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikrsHUO3M%2Bfvo0kO%2B3dPq8OHu5L2zBf3fa3jL2x@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <AANLkTikrsHUO3M%2Bfvo0kO%2B3dPq8OHu5L2zBf3fa3jL2x@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--/T+UM55GOh1Yge7W
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:19:00PM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:
> I've been trying to get an application compiled with gcc 4.5.1 running
> on FreeBSD 8.1, but it's been crashing during startup with a SIGBUS.
> It turns out that the problem is that gcc is issuing SSE
> instructions(in my case, a movdqa) that assume that the stack will be
> aligned to a 16-byte boundary.  It seems that Linux/i386 guarantees
> this, and I worry that gcc has extended this assumption to all i386
> architectures.  I'm assuming that FreeBSD doesn't make any such
> promises based on the fact that I'm getting crashes.
>=20
> There does seem to be a flag (-mstackrealign) that you can set to
> force gcc to align the stack to what it wants, but that pessimizes the
> generated code a bit.  Some googling would seem to indicate that
> -mpreferred-stack-boundary won't always handle this problem correctly.
>=20
> Any ideas?  My inclination, at least for our local source tree here at
> $WORK, would be to accommodate gcc and guarantee the stack alignment
> that it wants rather than pessimize our application.  It seems we have
> an old local patch/hack in our FreeBSD 6.1 tree(apparently based on
> this: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=3D438552+0+/usr/local/w=
ww/db/text/2000/freebsd-current/20000507.freebsd-current).
>  I believe that this patch is the reason why we haven't seen the
> problem when running on 6.1, but the patch doesn't seem to work
> anymore on 8.1.

Look at lib/csu/i386-elf/crt1_s.S, we align stack on startup.
My understanding is that the requirement is (%esp & 0xf) =3D=3D 0 just befo=
re
the call to the function. And we are off by 4 (this is my fault).

Please give this a try.

diff --git a/lib/csu/i386-elf/crt1_s.S b/lib/csu/i386-elf/crt1_s.S
index d7ed0a2..17ac0e3 100644
--- a/lib/csu/i386-elf/crt1_s.S
+++ b/lib/csu/i386-elf/crt1_s.S
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ _start:
 	.cfi_def_cfa_register %ebp
 	andl	$0xfffffff0,%esp # align stack
 	leal	8(%ebp),%eax
+	subl	$4,%esp
 	pushl	%eax		# argv
 	pushl	4(%ebp)		# argc
 	pushl	%edx		# rtld cleanup

--/T+UM55GOh1Yge7W
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAk0vYH8ACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4jg2ACghtY+dXLJHNnfBuHpzJwkBZID
Ve4AoNp18QlzNL9P/ZVNtakT0xmzAgLX
=lm2n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--/T+UM55GOh1Yge7W--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110113202848.GI2518>