This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Real purpose for failure in "Too restrictive sanity check"
- To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
- Subject: Re: Real purpose for failure in "Too restrictive sanity check"
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 10:33:54 -0600
- cc: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at cygnus dot com>, rth at cygnus dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <20000420134203.D9657@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>you write:
>
> Wed Apr 19 12:54:31 MET DST 2000 Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
> * calls.c (expand_call): Call compute_argument_block_size right
> before allocating the block; update comment; don't do alignment
> sanity checking for sibbling call; use args_size instead of
> unadjusted_args_size before args_size is adjusted.
As I mentioned in my previous message. I can't test this since it does not
apply to the current sources.
I did investigate the new PA64 problems a little. They are unrelated to your
recent calls.c patch. Sorry.
However, they are caused you recent loop.c change:
* loop.c (emit_iv_add_mult): Simplify it's input and emit
REG_EQUAL note explaining the calculated value.
This is causing the stage1 compiler to mis-compile genattrtab.
jeff
> Index: egcs/gcc/calls.c