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 -fstack-check implementation


> If you split the patch into fixing static stack checking and the rest would
> it make the fixing static stack checking mostly middle-end independent?

Yes, static stack checking is basically entirely in back-ends whereas dynamic 
stack checking is entirely in the middle-end (the latter has been rewritten 
in the process so as to be immune to wrap-around).  But some infrastructure 
bits are needed in the middle-end for static stack checking though and the 
bugs introduced since 3.x need to be fixed.

> I think fixing static statck checking should be uncontroversical and
> splitting it out for easier architecture maintainers review would be nice.

OK, I'll try and split it into as many pieces as possible.

> Is there a possibility to add C testcases (maybe architecture specific, for
> a popular architecture like x86) to incerase testing coverage of both
> features?

Yes.  In fact I think that you can write C++ testcases throwing and catching a 
stack overflow exception if compiled w/ -fstack-check -fnon-call-exceptions.

-- 
Eric Botcazou


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