| Message ID | AANLkTikO+hE7GQt-NHR-v_GbVUPL1-2mZQPAFxO1m5e-@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:32 AM, asharif tools <asharif.tools@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the quick replies, Ian and Jakub. > > Replies inline and please find below an updated patch that is pretty > close to minimal. This patch passes on trunk but fails with > (http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=153780): > > Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c (revision 0) > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c (revision 0) > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-fomit-frame-pointer" } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ > + > +void foo() > +{ > + int a=0, b=0, c=0, e=0, f=0, g=0, h=0, i=0; > + __asm__ __volatile__ ("" > + : > + : > + : "bp" > + ); > +} > + > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 08:20:38PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >>> You should be able to use "=r" and "r" instead of "=rbp" and "rbp". If >>> that works, then this patch is OK. > > I followed Jakub's suggestion to trim the testcase. > >> >> Also, please try to trim the list of variables (c through i), if you can > > The minimum number of integers needed to trigger this compilation failure is 8. > >> still reproduce the problem with the testcase. And you can probably use >> just "" instead of "addl %%rbp,%%rbp". > > Done. > > Comments/Suggestions? > Ping. Is this OK for trunk? I hope I have addressed your concerns/comments adequately.
asharif tools <asharif.tools@gmail.com> writes: > Thanks for the quick replies, Ian and Jakub. > > Replies inline and please find below an updated patch that is pretty > close to minimal. This patch passes on trunk but fails with > (http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=153780): > > Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c > =================================================================== > --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c (revision 0) > +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c (revision 0) > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-fomit-frame-pointer" } */ > +/* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ > + > +void foo() > +{ > + int a=0, b=0, c=0, e=0, f=0, g=0, h=0, i=0; > + __asm__ __volatile__ ("" > + : > + : > + : "bp" > + ); > +} This is OK with a ChangeLog entry. Thanks. Ian
Index: gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c (revision 0) +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/max-stack-align.c (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-fomit-frame-pointer" } */ +/* { dg-require-effective-target lp64 } */ + +void foo() +{ + int a=0, b=0, c=0, e=0, f=0, g=0, h=0, i=0; + __asm__ __volatile__ ("" + : + : + : "bp" + ); +} +