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 3/5] Fix NOTE_INSN_PROLOGUE_END after unconditional jump.


On 01/02/2016 12:16 PM, Marcin KoÅcielnicki wrote:
With the new s390 split-stack support, when optimization is enabled,
the cold path of calling __morestack is likely to be moved to the
end of the function.  This will result in the function ending in
split_stack_call_esa, which is an unconditional jump instruction and
part of the function prologue.  reposition_prologue_and_epilogue_notes
will insert NOTE_INSN_PROLOGUE_END right after it (and before the
following barrier), causing a verification error.  Insert it after
the barrier instead (and outside of basic block).

gcc/ChangeLog:

	* function.c (reposition_prologue_and_epilogue_notes): Avoid
	verification error if the last insn of prologue is an unconditional
	jump.
---
  gcc/ChangeLog  | 6 ++++++
  gcc/function.c | 6 ++++++
  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index 6aef3f9..56e31f6 100644
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,5 +1,11 @@
  2016-01-02  Marcin KoÅcielnicki  <koriakin@0x04.net>

+	* function.c (reposition_prologue_and_epilogue_notes): Avoid
+	verification error if the last insn of prologue is an unconditional
+	jump.
I'm guessing the BARRIER is actually in the hash table of prologue insns? Oh how I wish we didn't express barriers rtl.


Can this leave NOTEs with no associated basic block in the chain? reorder_blocks only fixes the block boundaries, it doesn't fix BLOCK_FOR_INSN.

Jeff



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