More space efficient virtual function calls
Wink Saville
wink@saville.com
Sun Jul 7 08:45:00 GMT 2002
Hello,
I was wondering if there was switch in gcc that would cause it to generate
smaller code when invoking virtual functions. I'm using GCC 3.1 ARM cross
compiler with -O3 and -fvtable-thunks=3, and it does the following when
calling a virtual function with no parameters:
LDR R1,[R4] /* Fetch the vtable pointer */
MOV R0,R4 /* R0 = this */
MOV LR, PC /* Set of the link register */
LDR PC,[R1, #4] /* Call virtual function 1, the second entry */
This is good code but it takes 20 bytes, what I was hoping for when I
enabled -fvtable-thunks=3 the compiler would use intermediate "thunks" to
invoke functions such as:
LDR R0,R4 /* R0 = this */
BL __VTFunc1 /* Branch and Link to virtual thunk function 1 */
...
__VTFunc0:
MOV R5,[R0] /* Get vtable pointer */
LDR PC,[R5,#0] /* Jump to the function */
__VTFunc1:
MOV R5,[R0] /* Get vtable pointer */
LDR PC,[R5,#4] /* Jump to the function */
__VTFunc2:
MOV R5,[R0] /* Get vtable pointer */
LDR PC,[R5,#8] /* Jump to the function */
This only costs 8 bytes per call instead of 20 (plus the size of the
_VTFuncX code). Of course this has at least two consequences, 1) A register,
in this example R5, would have to be reserved for use by the thunking code.
2) There is a performance hit because of two jumps. For space constrained
applications the trade off would be well worth it and the programmer should
be able to use a pragma or compiler switch to select which type of code to
emit.
Is this already possible with an existing switch/pragma?
Is this practical?
Would most of the modifications be need to needed to the front end, back end
or both?
Could someone point me to the places I would need to change to try this out?
Thanks,
Wink Saville
More information about the Gcc
mailing list