This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] S/390: Improve storing asan frame_pc
- From: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- To: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii at linux dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, krebbel at linux dot ibm dot com, jakub at redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 08:19:57 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] S/390: Improve storing asan frame_pc
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20190702130216.GI18316@gate.crashing.org>
On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 08:02:16AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 10:51:54AM +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> > +#undef TARGET_INSN_ALIGNMENT
> > +#define TARGET_INSN_ALIGNMENT 16
> There already is FUNCTION_BOUNDARY for something similar, which fits in
> well with STACK_BOUNDARY, PARM_BOUNDARY, many more *_BOUNDARY. I realise
> you may prefer a hook, but as long as we aren't getting rid of all the
> other macros, what's the point?
And maybe LABEL_BOUNDARY is bettter for this than INSN_BOUNDARY as well?