Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [Backport]
From 18bc61fc490330f5dc59639626fa9bb5269e31d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: ebotcazou <ebotcazou@138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:14:41 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 049/200] 	PR target/48142
 	* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_adjust_stack_and_probe): Differentiate
 	frame-related from frame-unrelated adjustments to the stack pointer.

git-svn-id: svn+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-4_6-branch@171778 138bc75d-0d04-0410-961f-82ee72b054a4

index 4fb654f..a524d77 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -9981,7 +9981,7 @@ ix86_adjust_stack_and_probe (const HOST_WIDE_INT size)
      probe that many bytes past the specified size to maintain a protection
      area at the botton of the stack.  */
   const int dope = 4 * UNITS_PER_WORD;
-  rtx size_rtx = GEN_INT (size);
+  rtx size_rtx = GEN_INT (size), last;
 
   /* See if we have a constant small number of probes to generate.  If so,
      that's the easy case.  The run-time loop is made up of 11 insns in the
@@ -10021,9 +10021,9 @@ ix86_adjust_stack_and_probe (const HOST_WIDE_INT size)
       emit_stack_probe (stack_pointer_rtx);
 
       /* Adjust back to account for the additional first interval.  */
-      emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, stack_pointer_rtx,
-			      plus_constant (stack_pointer_rtx,
-					     PROBE_INTERVAL + dope)));
+      last = emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, stack_pointer_rtx,
+				     plus_constant (stack_pointer_rtx,
+						    PROBE_INTERVAL + dope)));
     }
 
   /* Otherwise, do the same as above, but in a loop.  Note that we must be
@@ -10084,15 +10084,33 @@ ix86_adjust_stack_and_probe (const HOST_WIDE_INT size)
 	}
 
       /* Adjust back to account for the additional first interval.  */
-      emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, stack_pointer_rtx,
-			      plus_constant (stack_pointer_rtx,
-					     PROBE_INTERVAL + dope)));
+      last = emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, stack_pointer_rtx,
+				     plus_constant (stack_pointer_rtx,
+						    PROBE_INTERVAL + dope)));
 
       release_scratch_register_on_entry (&sr);
     }
 
   gcc_assert (cfun->machine->fs.cfa_reg != stack_pointer_rtx);
-  cfun->machine->fs.sp_offset += size;
+
+  /* Even if the stack pointer isn't the CFA register, we need to correctly
+     describe the adjustments made to it, in particular differentiate the
+     frame-related ones from the frame-unrelated ones.  */
+  if (size > 0)
+    {
+      rtx expr = gen_rtx_SEQUENCE (VOIDmode, rtvec_alloc (2));
+      XVECEXP (expr, 0, 0)
+	= gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, stack_pointer_rtx,
+		       plus_constant (stack_pointer_rtx, -size));
+      XVECEXP (expr, 0, 1)
+	= gen_rtx_SET (VOIDmode, stack_pointer_rtx,
+		       plus_constant (stack_pointer_rtx,
+				      PROBE_INTERVAL + dope + size));
+      add_reg_note (last, REG_FRAME_RELATED_EXPR, expr);
+      RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P (last) = 1;
+
+      cfun->machine->fs.sp_offset += size;
+    }
 
   /* Make sure nothing is scheduled before we are done.  */
   emit_insn (gen_blockage ());
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7964057
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/other/i386-9.C
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// PR target/48142
+// Testcase by Zdenek Sojka <zsojka@seznam.cz>
+
+// { dg-do run { target i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } }
+// { dg-options "-Os -mpreferred-stack-boundary=5 -fstack-check -fno-omit-frame-pointer" }
+
+int main()
+{
+  try { throw 0; }
+  catch (...) {}
+  return 0;
+}
-- 
1.7.0.4