This is the mail archive of the 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, testsuite] Fix PR37033, gcc.dg/pch/valid-1b.c failures

On Nov 18, 2008, Jakub Jelinek <> wrote:

> The rationale for the macro is to tell inline asm writers whether
> they can/should use .cfi* directives in their inline asm or not.

Hmm...  I just started working on a different approach to address this
problem, in the VTA branch.  My plan was to separate the can from the
should, and define the __GCC_HAVE_* macro based on can, as the name
sort of implies.  However...

> when .cfi_* directives are not emitted, using .cfi_rel_offset
> etc. in the inline asm will result in assembler errors,

... so I guess my patch won't quite work.

I guess it doesn't make sense to add this macro to the set of those
that can vary across PCH compilations either, like we used to tolerate
bumping -g down to -g0.  For asm code in the PCH will use unwanted
directives, and I guess that's where it's currently most likely to

It's quite unfortunate that -g PCH files will no longer be used with
-g0, but I don't see any good way to avoid this.  Unless...  How about
we kept CFI generation enabled throughout the compiler, in spite of
-g0, when using a PCH that had it enabled?  Then we'd emit eh sections
that we didn't need, but that's about it AFAICT.


Alexandre Oliva 
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! --   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist      Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer

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