From 36d22d82aa202bb199967e9512281e9a53db42c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Daniel Baumann Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:33:14 +0200 Subject: Adding upstream version 115.7.0esr. Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann --- .../tests/wasm/regress/baseline-bytereg.js | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) create mode 100644 js/src/jit-test/tests/wasm/regress/baseline-bytereg.js (limited to 'js/src/jit-test/tests/wasm/regress/baseline-bytereg.js') diff --git a/js/src/jit-test/tests/wasm/regress/baseline-bytereg.js b/js/src/jit-test/tests/wasm/regress/baseline-bytereg.js new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..8bdcc32618 --- /dev/null +++ b/js/src/jit-test/tests/wasm/regress/baseline-bytereg.js @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +// Bug 1322450 is about the baseline compiler not properly handling a byte store +// from a wider datum on 32-bit x86 because it does not move the value to be +// stored to a valid byte register if it is in a 32-bit register that does not +// have a byte part (EDI/ESI/EBP). +// +// This test is white-box because it knows about the register allocation order: +// the two values pushed onto the stack occupy EAX and ECX, and the i64.store8 +// will use EDX for the index and (EDI or ESI or EBP) for the low register of +// the value to be stored. The i64.store8 instruction will then assert in the +// assembler. +// +// If the baseline compiler starts allocating registers in a different order +// then this test will be ineffective. + +wasmEvalText(`(module + (memory 1) + (func $run (param i64) (param i32) (param i32) + local.get 1 + local.get 2 + i32.add + + local.get 1 + local.get 2 + i32.add + + i32.const 0 + local.get 0 + i64.store8 + + drop + drop + ) + (export "run" (func $run)) +)`); -- cgit v1.2.3