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] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation

From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt at redhat dot com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, richard dot guenther at gmail dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 09:25:57 -0600
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <20151129171444 dot GA21399 at gmail dot com> <565C267B dot 7000600 at redhat dot com>

On 11/30/2015 03:35 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:

On 11/29/2015 06:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:

Is this safe for stage 3?


Is there a reason to do it now? This doesn't include a testcase.

Handling the proposed attribute requires extensions to the currentfunction_arg capabilities.

I need to go back to the discussion between HJ, rth, Uros, myself andprobably others to get the full details. I recall two extensions to thecurrent set of return values from function_arg. One was to allow thetarget to return an address. That address will be forced by the genericcode into a pseudo.

I thought we agreed to one other extension to support the interruptmechanism, but again, I'll have to dig through the archives to rememberthe full details.

These extensions were necessary to avoid some horrid hacks in the x86backend which Uros, quite reasonably, rejected. We agreed to return tothis after stage1 opened.


jeff

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation
  - From: H.J. Lu

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