This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFA: PR 70044: Catch a second call to aarch64_override_options_after_change
- From: James Greenhalgh <james dot greenhalgh at arm dot com>
- To: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo dot tkachov at foss dot arm dot com>, marcus dot shawcroft at arm dot com, richard dot earnshaw at arm dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 15:23:03 +0000
- Subject: Re: RFA: PR 70044: Catch a second call to aarch64_override_options_after_change
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <87a8metl1a dot fsf at redhat dot com> <56D998B8 dot 6010507 at foss dot arm dot com> <56DD7E30 dot 10302 at redhat dot com>
On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 01:12:16PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Kyrill,
>
> > This is missing a second hunk from the patch you attached in the PR that I think is necessary
> > for this to work (setting to x_flag_omit_frame_pointer)...
>
> Doh! Silly me - there was a snafu restoring the patch after I had reverted it in order to
> check that the pre- and post- patch gcc test results were the same.
>
> > Note that this patch would expose a bug in common/config/aarch64/aarch64-common.c
> > where there's a thinko in the handling of OPT_momit_leaf_frame_pointer.
> > That's my bad and I'll propose a patch for it soon.
>
> OK.
>
> > Also, is there a way to create a testcase for the testuite?
> > i.e. is there a simple way to scan the assembly generated after the final LTO processing
> > for the presence of the frame pointer?
>
> Originally I thought not. But then I found scan-lto-assembler in testsuite/lib/scanasm.exp
> and that made everything simple.
>
> So attached is a revised patch with the missing second hunk restored and a testcase added.
> (Which I have checked and confirmed that it does fail without the patch and it does pass
> with the patch applied).
>
> OK to apply ?
OK, thanks.
> > Note that this patch would expose a bug in common/config/aarch64/aarch64-common.c
> > where there's a thinko in the handling of OPT_momit_leaf_frame_pointer.
> > That's my bad and I'll propose a patch for it soon.
I don't think I've seen this on list yet, it might be worth waiting until
Kyrill has put this patch up before you commit.
Thanks,
James