This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH for sibcalls on i386
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- To: John David Anglin <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:00:27 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: PATCH for sibcalls on i386
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, John David Anglin wrote:
> > If you don't agree, why not (as in "how comes that a sibcall
> > pattern matter in your case")?
>
> I've been looking and I don't have a full explanation yet. I see in
> expand call that try_tail_call is 0 and try_tail_recursion is 1. It
> looks like try_tail_call == 1 is necessary for sibcall generation
> (see line 2623 in calls.c). try_tail_call is 0 because
> FUNCTION_OK_FOR_SIBCALL always is 0 for TARGET_64BIT.
Seems like a bug. For the test-case, some well-placed "should"s
should (!) fix its misconception.
brgds, H-P