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: RFA: Pass -mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer to sse-10.c


> > 
> > This test passes -fno-omit-frame-pointer.  On most systems, that
> > implies -mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer -- but not on Solaris 10.  And,
> > it turns out that both are required for the test to pass.
> The -fno-omit-frame-pointer is specified because of warning:
> 
>   /* ??? Unwind info is not correct around the CFG unless either a frame
>      pointer is present or M_A_O_A is set.  Fixing this requires rewriting
>      unwind info generation to be aware of the CFG and propagating states
>      around edges.  */
>   if ((flag_unwind_tables || flag_asynchronous_unwind_tables
>        || flag_exceptions || flag_non_call_exceptions)
>       && flag_omit_frame_pointer
>       && !(target_flags & MASK_ACCUMULATE_OUTGOING_ARGS))
> 
> However since this thing is testing only flag_omit_frame_pointer.  This
> probably won't first with -fno-omit-frame-pointer.  Moreover I think it

Huh, I've managed to encode this in my typo system.  What I meant is
that the warning does not depend on -mno-omit-leaf-frame-pointer and
thus the problem you are seeing is probably independent.  

Honza


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