This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH] New tests for sibling call optimisation

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Andreas Bauer <baueran at in dot tum dot de>
Cc: Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot oz dot au>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 09:36:57 -0800
Subject: Re: [PATCH] New tests for sibling call optimisation
References: <20021104040248.GA895@kennel> <20021104043935.GA7200@mars.cs.mu.oz.au> <20021104083154.GB895@kennel>

On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 07:31:54PM +1100, Andreas Bauer wrote:
> 	gcc.dg/sibcall-6: New test for indirect sibcalls.

I'd much rather you tested this in some machine independant way,
so that all that is needed for new architectures is to add them
to the target list.

Hint: use __builtin_return_address(0).

> 	gcc.dg/sibcall-7: New test for indirect sibcalls with
> 	attribute `noreturn'.

This is pointless.  The restriction is partly due to a 
representation problem in the compiler.  The only thing
that we ought to be verifying is that we don't ICE and
don't generate incorrect code.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] New tests for sibling call optimisation
  - From: Andreas Bauer

References:
- [PATCH] New tests for sibling call optimisation
  - From: Andreas Bauer
- Re: [PATCH] New tests for sibling call optimisation
  - From: Fergus Henderson
- Re: [PATCH] New tests for sibling call optimisation
  - From: Andreas Bauer

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