This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Divide_1 testsuite fail due to a problem in the unwinding code
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 17:16:15 +0000
- Subject: Re: Divide_1 testsuite fail due to a problem in the unwinding code
- References: <20120127164616.GA8167@bart> <4F22D887.7070301@redhat.com> <4F22DB6F.6000805@gmail.com>
On 01/27/2012 05:14 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 27/01/2012 17:01, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> On 01/27/2012 04:46 PM, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
>
>>> Starting with this IRA patch:
>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg00028.html
>>> __divdi3 does *not* need a stack frame at all.
>>>
>>> So the CFAs of __divdi3 and probe_1 are the same!
>>
>> I'm confused.
>>
>> But __divdi3 should have been compiled with enough unwinder data
>> that it can be found; it should not matter whether __divdi3 has
>> a stack frame or not.
>>
>> So why doesn't __divdi3 have a CFA of its own?
>
> Unless I've misunderstood, it's because the CFA *is* the stack frame (base?)
> pointer.
Ah, it's not that it has no stack frame, it's that it has no
stack adjustment at all, not even a push?
Andrew.