This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Porting libsanitizer to aarch64


On 05/23/2013 09:43 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> So you're saying the documentation is wrong, or at the very least
> misleading...  What about dealing with address validation for soft accesses? 
> Surely we get better code if the SFP ~= HFP since we end up with fewer cases
> where we fall back to sub-optimal sequences.

It's not wrong, exactly.  It's exactly correct that the frame pointer in
question is the soft frame pointer at the beginning of rtl generation.

SFP != HFP can be tricky to do well, I agree.  For Alpha I was able to get good
results by allowing any signed 32-bit offset to SFP and then using
LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS to split the adjusted offset optimally.


r~


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