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: [RFA:] fix PR55030, wrong code from __builtin_setjmp_receiver

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:45:45 -0800
Subject: Re: [RFA:] fix PR55030, wrong code from __builtin_setjmp_receiver
References: <alpine.BSF.2.02.1211112347180.73231@dair.pair.com> <alpine.BSF.2.02.1211270637070.30315@dair.pair.com> <20121127120347.GU2315@tucnak.redhat.com> <20520021.fBU7p54CN9@polaris>

On 11/27/2012 09:35 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> It's well established in the RTL middle-end that UNSPEC_VOLATILE can do pretty 
> much everything behind the back of the compiler.

This is false.  U_V is a scheduling barrier, and is never deleted as
dead (as opposed to unreachable) code.  Certainly we don't do anything
so complete as invalidate all registers, nor do we invalidate memory.

r~

References:
- [RFA:] fix PR55030, wrong code from __builtin_setjmp_receiver
  - From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
- Re: [RFA:] fix PR55030, wrong code from __builtin_setjmp_receiver
  - From: Hans-Peter Nilsson
- Re: [RFA:] fix PR55030, wrong code from __builtin_setjmp_receiver
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [RFA:] fix PR55030, wrong code from __builtin_setjmp_receiver
  - From: Eric Botcazou

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