[PR64164] drop copyrename, integrate into expand
Richard Biener
richard.guenther@gmail.com
Tue Jul 21 13:25:00 GMT 2015
On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Jul 16, 2015, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> So, I decided to run a ppc64le-linux-gnu bootstrap, just in case, and
>> there are issues with split complex parms that caused go and fortran
>> libs to fail the build.
>
> This incremental patch, along with the previously-posted patches, fix
> split complex args handling with preassigned args RTL, and enables
> ppc64le-linux-gnu bootstrap to succeed.
>
> I'm not particularly happy with the abuse of DECL_CONTEXT to recognize
> split complex args and leave their RTL alone, but that was the best that
> occurred to me. Any other suggestions?
>
> Is the combined patch ok, assuming further (re)testing of embedded
> targets passes?
>
> for gcc/ChangeLog (to be integrated with the approved patches)
>
> * function.c (split_complex_args): Take assign_parm_data_all
> argument. Pass it to rtl_for_parm. Set up rtl and context
> for split args.
> (assign_parms_augmented_arg_list): Adjust.
> (maybe_reset_rtl_for_parm): Recognize split complex args.
> * stor-layout.c (layout_decl): Don't set mem attributes of
> non-MEMs.
> ---
> gcc/function.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> gcc/stor-layout.c | 3 ++-
> 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/function.c b/gcc/function.c
> index 753d889..6fba001 100644
> --- a/gcc/function.c
> +++ b/gcc/function.c
> @@ -151,6 +151,8 @@ static bool contains (const_rtx, hash_table<insn_cache_hasher> *);
> static void prepare_function_start (void);
> static void do_clobber_return_reg (rtx, void *);
> static void do_use_return_reg (rtx, void *);
> +static rtx rtl_for_parm (struct assign_parm_data_all *, tree);
> +
>
> /* Stack of nested functions. */
> /* Keep track of the cfun stack. */
> @@ -2267,7 +2269,7 @@ assign_parms_initialize_all (struct assign_parm_data_all *all)
> needed, else the old list. */
>
> static void
> -split_complex_args (vec<tree> *args)
> +split_complex_args (struct assign_parm_data_all *all, vec<tree> *args)
> {
> unsigned i;
> tree p;
> @@ -2278,6 +2280,7 @@ split_complex_args (vec<tree> *args)
> if (TREE_CODE (type) == COMPLEX_TYPE
> && targetm.calls.split_complex_arg (type))
> {
> + tree cparm = p;
> tree decl;
> tree subtype = TREE_TYPE (type);
> bool addressable = TREE_ADDRESSABLE (p);
> @@ -2296,6 +2299,9 @@ split_complex_args (vec<tree> *args)
> DECL_ARTIFICIAL (p) = addressable;
> DECL_IGNORED_P (p) = addressable;
> TREE_ADDRESSABLE (p) = 0;
> + /* Reset the RTL before layout_decl, or it may change the
> + mode of the RTL of the original argument copied to P. */
> + SET_DECL_RTL (p, NULL_RTX);
> layout_decl (p, 0);
> (*args)[i] = p;
>
> @@ -2307,6 +2313,25 @@ split_complex_args (vec<tree> *args)
> DECL_IGNORED_P (decl) = addressable;
> layout_decl (decl, 0);
> args->safe_insert (++i, decl);
> +
> + /* If we are assigning parameters for a function, rather
> + than for a call, propagate the RTL of the complex parm to
> + the split declarations, and set their contexts so that
> + maybe_reset_rtl_for_parm can recognize them and refrain
> + from resetting their RTL. */
> + if (cfun->gimple_df)
If the cfun->gimple_df check is to decide whether this is a call or a function
then no, this can't work reliably. What is this test for else?
You pass another argument to split_complex_arg, so why not pass in a bool
on whether we split it for this or the other case?
Richard.
> + {
> + rtx rtl = rtl_for_parm (all, cparm);
> + gcc_assert (!rtl || GET_CODE (rtl) == CONCAT);
> + if (rtl)
> + {
> + SET_DECL_RTL (p, XEXP (rtl, 0));
> + SET_DECL_RTL (decl, XEXP (rtl, 1));
> +
> + DECL_CONTEXT (p) = cparm;
> + DECL_CONTEXT (decl) = cparm;
> + }
> + }
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -2369,7 +2394,7 @@ assign_parms_augmented_arg_list (struct assign_parm_data_all *all)
>
> /* If the target wants to split complex arguments into scalars, do so. */
> if (targetm.calls.split_complex_arg)
> - split_complex_args (&fnargs);
> + split_complex_args (all, &fnargs);
>
> return fnargs;
> }
> @@ -2823,6 +2848,16 @@ maybe_reset_rtl_for_parm (tree parm)
> {
> gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (parm) == PARM_DECL
> || TREE_CODE (parm) == RESULT_DECL);
> +
> + /* This is a split complex parameter, and its context was set to its
> + original PARM_DECL in split_complex_args so that we could
> + recognize it here and not reset its RTL. */
> + if (DECL_CONTEXT (parm) && TREE_CODE (DECL_CONTEXT (parm)) == PARM_DECL)
> + {
> + DECL_CONTEXT (parm) = DECL_CONTEXT (DECL_CONTEXT (parm));
> + return;
> + }
> +
> if ((flag_tree_coalesce_vars
> || (DECL_RTL_SET_P (parm) && DECL_RTL (parm) == pc_rtx))
> && is_gimple_reg (parm))
> diff --git a/gcc/stor-layout.c b/gcc/stor-layout.c
> index 0d4f4a4..288227a 100644
> --- a/gcc/stor-layout.c
> +++ b/gcc/stor-layout.c
> @@ -794,7 +794,8 @@ layout_decl (tree decl, unsigned int known_align)
> {
> PUT_MODE (rtl, DECL_MODE (decl));
> SET_DECL_RTL (decl, 0);
> - set_mem_attributes (rtl, decl, 1);
> + if (MEM_P (rtl))
> + set_mem_attributes (rtl, decl, 1);
> SET_DECL_RTL (decl, rtl);
> }
> }
>
>
> --
> Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
> You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
> Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member
> Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list