[PING] [PATCH v4 0/12] [i386] Improve 64-bit Microsoft to System V ABI pro/epilogues

Uros Bizjak ubizjak@gmail.com
Sun May 14 10:25:00 GMT 2017


On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 05/13/2017 11:52 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ping?  I have posted revisions of the following in patch set:
>>>
>>> 05/12 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-04/msg01442.html
>>> 09/12 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg00348.html
>>> 11/12 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-05/msg00350.html
>>>
>>> I have retested them on Linux x86-64 in addition a Wine testsuite
>>> comparison
>>> resulting in fewer failed tests (31) than when using unpatched 7.1.0 (78)
>>> and 5.4.0 (78).  A cursory examination of the now working failures with
>>> 7.1.0 seemed to be to be due to race conditions in Wine that are
>>> incidentally hidden after the patches.
>>>
>>> Is there anything else needed before we can commit these?  They still
>>> rebase
>>> cleanly onto the HEAD, but I can repost as "v5" if you prefer.
>>
>> Please go ahead and commit the patches.
>>
>> However, please stay around to fix possible fallout. As said - you are
>> touching quite complex part of the compiler ...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Uros.
>
>
> Thanks!  I'll definitely be around, I have a lot more that I'm working on
> with C generics/pseudo-templates (all middle-end stuff). I also want to
> examine more ways that SSE saves/restores can be omitted in these ms to sysv
> calls through static analysis and such.
>
> Anyway, I don't yet have SVN write access, will you sponsor my request?

The patchset was committed to mainline SVN as r248029.

Uros.



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list