[Bug middle-end/26831] New: sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop: standard names not documented.

[Bug middle-end/26831] New: sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop: standard names not documented.

[dave dot korn at artimi dot com]

As the subject says, these four standard names are not documented.  By analogy
to the way in which "sibcall_epilogue" has a separate entry from "epilogue",
they should also have their own entries in the "standard pattern names for
generation" chapter of the internals manual.  The entry for
FUNCTION_OK_FOR_SIBCALL even refers to "the 'sibcall' md pattern", but there is
no other mention of it.

  Note also that if you implement siball_epilogue by emitting a
fully-schedulable RTL epilogue (rather than just using an unspec to represent
the entire thing as a black box to the compiler and emitting it opencoded at
assembler output generation time like the arm port does in 3.3.3 where I
discovered this), you may also need to implement these sibcall patterns, or you
can get ICEn when the register allocator gets confused in one of the later
passes.  This dependency is not mentioned anywhere.  However I have not tested
it against 4.x/HEAD to see if it remains the case.

    cheers, 
       DaveK


-- 
           Summary: sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop:
                    standard names not documented.
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.2.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: middle-end
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: dave dot korn at artimi dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26831

[Bug middle-end/26831] sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop: standard names not documented.

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-03-23 20:49 -------
Interesting, sibcall_epilogue is documented though.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Standard-Names.html#Standard-Names


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2006-03-23 20:49:05
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26831

[Bug middle-end/26831] sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop: standard names not documented.

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-03-26 17:20 -------
Note I would like these standard names documented also since I would need them
to implement them on the SPU (SPE on the Cell) target.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26831

[Bug middle-end/26831] sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop: standard names not documented.

[dave dot korn at artimi dot com]

------- Comment #3 from dave dot korn at artimi dot com  2006-03-27 10:05 -------
  Added by rth's sibcall optimisations back in March 2000:

http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=32612&view=rev

  Should we give him a ping?

   cheers, 
      DaveK


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26831

[Bug middle-end/26831] sibcall, sibcall_value, sibcall_pop, sibcall_value_pop: standard names not documented.

[Paulo dot Matos at csr dot com]

------- Comment #4 from Paulo dot Matos at csr dot com  2010-01-06 10:46 -------
Almost four years have gone and nobody was able to document these. It would be
nice to see these in the docs! :-)

I am looking for them since I don't know what they are for at the moment,
otherwise I could give it a go and contribute!


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26831