This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [TESTCASE] Minimized testcase for AltiVec segfault
- From: Daniel Egger <degger at fhm dot edu>
- To: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GCC Developer Mailinglist <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 28 Feb 2002 03:08:07 +0100
- Subject: Re: [TESTCASE] Minimized testcase for AltiVec segfault
- References: <9BE91334-2BD9-11D6-87D4-000393750C1E@redhat.com>
Am Don, 2002-02-28 um 00.27 schrieb Aldy Hernandez:
> how about local variables? there are some magic alignment rules
> that are keyed off of abi=altivec. ... especially the stack boundary.
Local vector variables on stack in a three liner? With 32 registers that
should be quite unlikely.
> how about vrsave? surely you need vrsave to be set properly, otherwise
> the OS will not save your vector registers on a context-switch.
Don't care. There are no other applications using AltiVec.
> how about the prologue and epilogue? the altivec registers won't be
> saved/restored unless abi=altivec.
Don't need to.
> some call used registers being altivec?
> i guess you could use all global variables, and have the OS
> save/restore all vector registers on a context switch (slooow).
Don't need to be and when I'd be using -mabi=altivec now that I know.
> perhaps this needs to be readressed and having -maltivec imply an
> abi change^Wenhancement. i for one, wouldn't mind getting
> rid of -mabi=altivec, but i believe geoff wanted it that way.
I just wanted to point out that the generated code doesn't seem
to be right when used without that mystic switch and in my
opinion it should be. I don't need any of the spiffy features like
vector arguments, varargs, vectors on stack, vectors used by callers
in this special case.