This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: UroÅ Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, Alan Lawrence <alan dot lawrence at arm dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, James Greenhalgh <James dot Greenhalgh at arm dot com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Christophe Lyon <christophe dot lyon at linaro dot org>, David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:16:36 -0300
- Subject: Re: [PR67891] drop is_gimple_reg test from set_parm_rtl
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <orio9cw10j dot fsf at livre dot home> <orwpxqvqnp dot fsf at livre dot home> <20150723203112 dot GB27818 at gate dot crashing dot org> <CAMe9rOpR+2gPxo0tKaRPtcML_Q4=r-_=9iqk+_JZFPkM=eN=BQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOpbLEyDexVJqJAFJ3W6o4AktNog-jwk2CY4GZkrmT+nfA at mail dot gmail dot com> <or4mkmhgc9 dot fsf at livre dot home> <CAMe9rOp=S5fu1N=i7waswCYqJeLBCrySqYdFYkVa7LV04vpQSg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOrq+ZBAg1nZ1twEcPqwBj4j9+XA+SXQJVWWzjfdvidjtw at mail dot gmail dot com> <or1tfkdjhj dot fsf at livre dot home> <20150810082355 dot GA31149 at arm dot com> <55C8BFC3 dot 3030603 at redhat dot com> <CAKQMxzRzMrGtf921vqXCno5uoBN+uzsnJ5wX2Twmvhp1ziAEcA at mail dot gmail dot com> <or37zlpujd dot fsf at livre dot home> <55E72D4C dot 40705 at arm dot com> <orfv2wxygm dot fsf at livre dot home> <55FC3171 dot 7040509 at arm dot com> <ord1x8nblu dot fsf at livre dot home> <CAFiYyc1x2124-YgLmP_Yt+mBgyv_2Yp=O7G4WX9dbYfEs6z=NQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <orsi5k7gde dot fsf_-_ at livre dot home> <oroag87az2 dot fsf_-_ at livre dot home> <CAFiYyc2GvwkNOwpE2xYGHZRPLnQaSWG6MjbiMidDdJyBbRV8XA at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Oct 9, 2015, Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok. Note that I think emit_block_move shouldn't mess with the addressable flag.
I have successfully tested a patch that stops it from doing so,
reverting https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49429#c11 but
according to bugs 49429 and 49454, it looks like removing it would mess
with escape analysis introduced in r175063 for bug 44194. The thread
that introduces the mark_addressable calls suggests some discomfort with
this solution, and even a suggestion that the markings should be
deferred past the end of expand, but in the end there was agreement to
go with it. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-06/msg01746.html
I'm leaving it alone, since I can't reasonably test on the platforms
where the problems showed up.
--
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer