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] | |
On Thu, 2007-05-24 at 21:25 +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> If function A calls long_call function B, the ARM port tries to
> convert the call into a short call if it thinks B is in range.
> There is some code to prevent this optimisation when A and B
> are in different sections, but it isn't complete:
>
> - Non-sibling and sibling calls to B are shortened when B is weak.
> (The strong definition might not be in range.)
>
??? I was under the impression that the opposite was true for
non-sibling calls: namely that calls to a weak B were never shortened,
even if the user hadn't requested long calls. Eg:
int y;
int __attribute__((weak)) x () { return y; }
int f() { return x(); }
generates an indirect call when compiled with -O.
> - Sibling calls to B are shortened without checking A's section.
>
> - Non-sibling calls to B are shortened for PIC, even if B can
> be overridden.
>
> The optimisation also seems somewhat limited:
>
> (1) B must be defined before A.
>
The code was written before unit-at-a-time was added; it's never been
updated.
> (2) Sibcalls to B are never shortened for PIC, even if the definition
> of B cannot be overridden.
>
> (3) Calls are not shortened if A and B are in the same non-default section.
[...]
> Tested on arm-eabi and arm-wrs-vxworks (to be submitted in a sec).
> OK to install?
Yes, this is OK. Thanks for looking into this, that's another item on
my todo list that I can remove... :-)
R.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |