This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Problem with std_expand_builtin_va_start on targets where sizetype and ptr_type_node don't have the same mode
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: "Zack Weinberg" <zackw at panix dot com>
- Cc: "GCC Development" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "GCC Patches" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 06 Jul 2007 08:52:36 -0700
- Subject: Re: Problem with std_expand_builtin_va_start on targets where sizetype and ptr_type_node don't have the same mode
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
"Zack Weinberg" <email@example.com> writes:
> On 05 Jul 2007 18:22:50 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > "Zack Weinberg" <email@example.com> writes:
> > [std_expand_builtin_va_start]
> > > rtx va_r = expand_normal (valist);
> > > emit_move_insn (va_r, nextarg);
> > >
> > > but this is a part of the compiler I am not at all familiar with...
> > I think you would want something more like
> > rtx va_r = expand_expr (valist, NULL_RTX, VOIDmode, EXPAND_WRITE);
> > convert_move (va_r, nextarg, 0);
> No regressions on arm-elf (simulator, default and -mthumb); in fact,
> execute/20040709-1.c stops ICEing at -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer, but I
> think this is spurious, as that test has no variadic functions in it.
> OK to commit?
Yes, this is OK. Thanks for testing it.