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: PATCH: Fix split_stack_return

From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:27:49 -0700
Subject: Re: PATCH: Fix split_stack_return
References: <20101026211731.GA3834@intel.com> <AANLkTim_MiLrT3QKaM98mZaeCQ+Kf8HcJPxdz_mc+etd@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTiki+kMNSS-YNBdKv_1x15GA8RyTb1wpfOpfHCCU@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:26 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> vs.
>
> (define_insn "avx_vzeroupper"
> Â[(unspec_volatile [(match_operand 0 "const_int_operand" "")]
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â ÂUNSPECV_VZEROUPPER)]
>
> I generate avx_zeroupper. ÂBut it matches split_stack_return
> since (int) UNSPEC_STACK_CHECK == (int) UNSPECV_VZEROUPPER.

Why are they equal?  That is the bug really.

-- Pinski

Follow-Ups:
- Re: PATCH: Fix split_stack_return
  - From: H.J. Lu

References:
- PATCH: Fix split_stack_return
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: PATCH: Fix split_stack_return
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: PATCH: Fix split_stack_return
  - From: H.J. Lu

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