| Message ID | 56B347B5.10205@0x04.net |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 04/02/16 13:44, Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: > On 03/02/16 18:27, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> Marcin KoÅ›cielnicki wrote: >> >>> libgcc/ChangeLog: >>> >>> * config.host: Use t-stack and t-stack-s390 for s390*-*-linux. >>> * config/s390/morestack.S: New file. >>> * config/s390/t-stack-s390: New file. >>> * generic-morestack.c (__splitstack_find): Add s390-specific code. >>> >>> gcc/ChangeLog: >>> >>> * common/config/s390/s390-common.c (s390_supports_split_stack): >>> New function. >>> (TARGET_SUPPORTS_SPLIT_STACK): New macro. >>> * config/s390/s390-protos.h: Add s390_expand_split_stack_prologue. >>> * config/s390/s390.c (struct machine_function): New field >>> split_stack_varargs_pointer. >>> (s390_register_info): Mark r12 as clobbered if it'll be used as temp >>> in s390_emit_prologue. >>> (s390_emit_prologue): Use r12 as temp if r1 is taken by split-stack >>> vararg pointer. >>> (morestack_ref): New global. >>> (SPLIT_STACK_AVAILABLE): New macro. >>> (s390_expand_split_stack_prologue): New function. >>> (s390_live_on_entry): New function. >>> (s390_va_start): Use split-stack vararg pointer if appropriate. >>> (s390_asm_file_end): Emit the split-stack note sections. >>> (TARGET_EXTRA_LIVE_ON_ENTRY): New macro. >>> * config/s390/s390.md (UNSPEC_STACK_CHECK): New unspec. >>> (UNSPECV_SPLIT_STACK_CALL): New unspec. >>> (UNSPECV_SPLIT_STACK_DATA): New unspec. >>> (split_stack_prologue): New expand. >>> (split_stack_space_check): New expand. >>> (split_stack_data): New insn. >>> (split_stack_call): New expand. >>> (split_stack_call_*): New insn. >>> (split_stack_cond_call): New expand. >>> (split_stack_cond_call_*): New insn. >>> --- >>> Changes applied. Testsuite still running, still works on my simple >>> tests. >>> >>> As for common code prerequisites: #3 is no longer needed, and very >>> likely >>> so is #4 (it fixes problems that I've only seen with ESA mode, and >>> testsuite >>> runs just fine without it now). >> >> OK, I see. The patch is OK for mainline then, assuming testing passes. > > Well, testing passes (as in, is no worse than x86 - the testsuite > doesn't really agree with -fsplit-stack in a few places involving > backtraces). However, there's still the libgo issue to be taken care > of. For my tests, I patched it up with: > [...] I see the libgo patch has landed today. Can we get this pushed? Marcin Kościelnicki
diff --git a/libgo/runtime/proc.c b/libgo/runtime/proc.c index c25a217..efa6806 100644 --- a/libgo/runtime/proc.c +++ b/libgo/runtime/proc.c @@ -2016,17 +2016,19 @@ doentersyscall() m->locks++; // Leave SP around for GC and traceback. + { #ifdef USING_SPLIT_STACK - g->gcstack = __splitstack_find(nil, nil, &g->gcstack_size, - &g->gcnext_segment, &g->gcnext_sp, - &g->gcinitial_sp); + size_t size_tmp; + g->gcstack = __splitstack_find(nil, nil, &size_tmp, + &g->gcnext_segment, &g->gcnext_sp, + &g->gcinitial_sp); + g->gcstack_size = size_tmp; #else - { void *v; g->gcnext_sp = (byte *) &v; - } #endif + } g->status = Gsyscall; @@ -2064,9 +2066,13 @@ runtime_entersyscallblock(void) // Leave SP around for GC and traceback. #ifdef USING_SPLIT_STACK - g->gcstack = __splitstack_find(nil, nil, &g->gcstack_size, - &g->gcnext_segment, &g->gcnext_sp, - &g->gcinitial_sp); + { + size_t size_tmp; + g->gcstack = __splitstack_find(nil, nil, &size_tmp, + &g->gcnext_segment, &g->gcnext_sp, + &g->gcinitial_sp); + g->gcstack_size = size_tmp; + } #else g->gcnext_sp = (byte *) &p; #endif