RE: [PATCH, ARM] Fix PR64453: live high register not saved in function prolog with -Os

["Thomas Preud'homme" <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com>]

Done for backport to 4.8.

Best regards,

Thomas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> owner@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 5:35 PM
> To: Ramana Radhakrishnan
> Cc: gcc-patches; Richard Biener; Jakub Jelinek
> Subject: RE: [PATCH, ARM] Fix PR64453: live high register not saved in
> function prolog with -Os
> 
> Just committed to 4.9 branch, 4.8 to follow once regression testsuite for
> 4.8 backport finishes running (backport was done quite some time ago
> now).
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana.gcc@googlemail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 4:07 PM
> > To: Thomas Preud'homme
> > Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan; gcc-patches; Richard Biener; Jakub Jelinek
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH, ARM] Fix PR64453: live high register not saved in
> > function prolog with -Os
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
> > <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Ramana,
> > >
> > >> From: Ramana Radhakrishnan [mailto:ramana.gcc@googlemail.com]
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 7:21 PM
> > >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Thomas Preud'homme
> > >> <thomas.preudhomme@arm.com> wrote:
> > >> > When compiling for size, live high registers are not saved in
> function
> > >> prolog in ARM backend in Thumb mode. The problem comes from
> > >> arm_conditional_register_usage setting call_used_regs for all high
> > >> register to avoid them being allocated. However, this cause prolog
> to
> > not
> > >> save these register even if they are used. This patch marks high
> > registers
> > >> as really needing to be saved in prolog if live, no matter what is the
> > >> content of call_used_regs.
> > >> >
> > >> > ChangeLog entries are as follows:
> > >> >
> > >> > gcc/ChangeLog
> > >> >
> > >> > 2015-01-12 Thomas Preud'homme
> thomas.preudhomme@arm.com
> > >> >
> > >> >     PR target/64453
> > >> >     * config/arm/arm.c (callee_saved_reg_p): Define.
> > >> >     (arm_compute_save_reg0_reg12_mask): Use
> > callee_saved_reg_p
> > >> to check if
> > >> >     register is callee saved instead of !call_used_regs[reg].
> > >> >     (thumb1_compute_save_reg_mask): Likewise.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> > >> >
> > >> > 2014-12-31 Thomas Preud'homme
> thomas.preudhomme@arm.com
> > >> >
> > >> >     * gcc.target/arm/pr64453.c: New.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> OK.
> > >>
> > >> Ramana
> > >
> > > The patch applies cleanly on GCC 4.8 and 4.9 branches when omitting
> > the cosmetic change
> > > in arm_conditional_register_usage () which was unintended. I
> > compiled an arm-none-eabi
> > > GCC cross compiler and ran the testsuite for both backport without
> any
> > regression.
> > >
> > > Is this ok for the 4.8 and 4.9 branches?
> > >
> >
> > OK for the branches if no RM objects in 24 hours.
> >
> > Ramana
> >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Thomas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> 
> 
> 
>