This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: BUG: GCC-4.4.x changes the function frame on some functions
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: rostedt at goodmis dot org
- Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa at zytor dot com>, David Daney <ddaney at caviumnetworks dot com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation dot org>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix dot de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte dot hu>, LKML <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation dot org>, Heiko Carstens <heiko dot carstens at de dot ibm dot com>, feng dot tang at intel dot com, Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec at gmail dot com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz at infradead dot org>, jakub at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:58:55 -0700
- Subject: Re: BUG: GCC-4.4.x changes the function frame on some functions
- References: <viy9pk4xossnb6m2v041qu00.1258665258503@email.android.com> <4B05B7AD.20500@redhat.com> <1258670580.22249.1002.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
On 11/19/09 15:43, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 14:25 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
Having said all that, I don't expect to personally be looking at the
problem, given the list of other codegen issues that need to be looked
at (reload in particular), profiling/stack interactions would be around
87 millionth on my list.
Is there someone else that can look at it?
Unsure at the moment... Like everyone else, GCC developers are busy and
this probably isn't going to be a high priority item for anyone.
Or at the very least, could you point us to where that code is, and one
of us tracing folks could take a crack at switching hats to be a
compiler writer (with the obvious prerequisite of drinking a lot of beer
first, or is there a better drug to cope with the pain of writing gcc?).
It _might_ be as easy as defining PROFILE_BEFORE_PROLOGUE in
gcc-<someversion>gcc/config/i386/linux.h & rebuilding GCC.
Based on comments elsewhere, the sun386i support may have used
PROFILE_BEFORE_PROLOGUE in the past and thus the x86 backend may not
need further adjustment. That is obviously the ideal case.
If that appears to work for your needs, I'll volunteer to test it more
thoroughly and assuming those tests look good shepherd it into the
source tree.
Jeff