This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gimple-low.c:lower_function_body
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 19:18:44 -0400
- Subject: Re: gimple-low.c:lower_function_body
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <10406082055.AA24247@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 16:55, Richard Kenner wrote:
> What does it mean to "lower" a function body?
>
Removing some abstractions to make it more amenable to other passes:
removing binding contours, making exception handling explicit, etc. In
the future it may include exposing address arithmetic and anything we
may find useful for future optimizations.
I discuss it (very) briefly in this year's Summit paper on tree-ssa and
it's described in doc/passes.texi.
> Anyway, what I'm running into is that it appears to be "lowering" a
> variable-sized variable inside a function to the outer level (why?)
> and then getting an ICE since there's no binding level to use
> to save the stack pointer with. I can't figure out how this is supposed
> to work due to lack of documentation.
>
Sorry, the description is vague, could you post a test case?
Thanks. Diego.