This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Problem with sibcalls
- To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at balti dot cygnus dot co dot uk>
- Subject: Re: Problem with sibcalls
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 13:22:47 -0800
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jakub at redhat dot com
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003241514100.31919-100000@balti.cygnus.co.uk>
On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 03:17:44PM +0000, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> The instruction that pushes the address of the label is inside a
> CALL_PLACEHOLDER, so we never notice that the label is used, and turn
> it into a NOTE_INSN_DELETED_LABEL. This later causes mark_jump_label
> to call abort.
Yes, Jakub noticed this in doing the sparc tailcall support.
He has a patch pending, which I just acked this morning.
> OK to install patch and testcase?
Yes.
Jakub, I like this implementation better than putting the
secondary loops inside mark_jump_label.
r~