public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "andi at firstfloor dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/116497] static functions ABI should be improved for SSE caller saved registers Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 06:17:23 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-116497-4-NYTf9AhcRr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-116497-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116497 --- Comment #4 from andi at firstfloor dot org --- The change of the subject is incorrect. The transformation has nothing to do with static function: consider LTO or someone might write an interpreter spread over multiple files. > always need to keep on changing the sources of the application rather than ever > doing improvements to GCC that would help code that didn't even know about the > attributes. The same is true of this whole musttail attribute. It does nothing > except provide an error message. There are better ways of implementing that > inside GCC really than the attribute that was added. GCC has -fopt-info which > should have been used instead. -fopt-info is not a useful interface for checking for an transformation that is needed for correctness. > Here is another place where the attribute is just a way to hack around instead > of improving GCC for ABI for static functions. So yes the compiler might figure this out on its own for some cases, but it would need this proposed attribute semantic change anyways to do this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-27 6:17 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-08-27 5:42 [Bug target/116497] New: Need no_caller_saved_registers with SSE support andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 5:49 ` [Bug target/116497] " andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 5:50 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 5:58 ` [Bug target/116497] static functions ABI should be improved for SSE caller saved registers pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 6:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 6:17 ` andi at firstfloor dot org [this message] 2024-08-27 6:25 ` [Bug target/116497] Need no_caller_saved_registers with SSE support pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 7:58 ` liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 8:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 8:10 ` andi at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 8:14 ` andi at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 8:26 ` xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 13:27 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2024-08-27 14:21 ` andi at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 14:33 ` andi at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 14:47 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-08-27 15:19 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2024-08-27 15:53 ` andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 16:25 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2024-08-27 17:06 ` andi at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 17:12 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2024-08-27 17:49 ` andi at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 17:50 ` andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2024-08-27 17:50 ` andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-116497-4-NYTf9AhcRr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).