This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch RFC] SH: Use FRAME_GROWS_DOWNWARD
Kaz Kojima wrote:
I've tried it for the stack-smashing protector support:
PPC uses the conditionalized FRAME_GROWS_DOWNWARD like as
(flag_stack_protect != 0). Can we avoid the worse code
generation for -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-stack-protector
Yes, that makes sense.
Come to think of it, I can't actually recall why we ended up with
an inverted allocation pattern for -fomit-frame-pointer, and hence
I can't verify we still do by merely looking at the source.
The partial spilling code might also have changed the correlation
between offset and usage frequency for -fno-omit-frame-pointer.
This probably calls for some experiments.