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] Add __builtin_stack_top


On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Segher Boessenkool
<segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 10:28:00AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> Any comments on my middle-end patch?
>> >
>> > So, if the answer is the same as frame_address (0), why not have the fallback just expand to that?  Then, one can use this builtin everywhere that frame address is used today.  People that want a faster, tighter port can then implement the hook and achieve higher performance.
>>
>> The motivation of __builtin_stack_top is that frame_address requires a
>> frame pointer register, which isn't desirable for x86.  __builtin_stack_top
>> doesn't require a frame pointer register.
>
> If the target just returns frame_pointer_rtx from INITIAL_FRAME_ADDRESS_RTX,
> you don't get crtl->accesses_prior_frames set either, and as far as I can
> see everything works fine?  For __builtin_frame_address(0).
>
> You might have a reason why you want the entry stack address instead of the
> frame address, but you didn't really explain I think?  Or I missed it.
>

expand_builtin_return_addr sets

crtl->accesses_prior_frames = 1;

for __builtin_frame_address, which requires a frame pointer register.
__builtin_stack_top doesn't set crtl->accesses_prior_frames and frame
pointer register isn't required.

-- 
H.J.


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