This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: builtin_return_addr vs frame_pointer_needed vs -O3

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Ian Dall <ian at beware dot dropbear dot id dot au>
Cc: schwab at suse dot de, dj at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 18:42:11 -0700
Subject: Re: builtin_return_addr vs frame_pointer_needed vs -O3
References: <200101312226.RAA29943@greed.delorie.com> <20010131170452.A13854@redhat.com> <15641.30554.720720.529367@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20020626074538.C25683@redhat.com> <jebs9y6pq3.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <15642.18479.449591.859902@sibyl.beware.dropbear.id.au>

On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 08:33:11AM +0930, Ian Dall wrote:
> Maybe that particular test should just not be run with -fomit-frame-pointer?

That's probably easiest.  You should be able to detect
that in a .x file.


r~

References:
- Re: builtin_return_addr vs frame_pointer_needed vs -O3
  - From: Ian Dall
- Re: builtin_return_addr vs frame_pointer_needed vs -O3
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: builtin_return_addr vs frame_pointer_needed vs -O3
  - From: Andreas Schwab
- Re: builtin_return_addr vs frame_pointer_needed vs -O3
  - From: Ian Dall

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]