From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 112160 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2016 22:02:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 112132 invoked by uid 89); 5 Feb 2016 22:02:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=unfixed, larllike, resubmitted, larl-like X-HELO: e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com Received: from e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com (HELO e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com) (195.75.94.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (CAMELLIA256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 22:02:38 +0000 Received: from localhost by e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 22:02:34 -0000 Received: from d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.20.13) by e06smtp16.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.146) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 22:02:33 -0000 X-IBM-Helo: d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com X-IBM-MailFrom: uweigand@de.ibm.com X-IBM-RcptTo: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by d06dlp01.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73CE317D8056 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 22:02:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.249]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u15M2WCn4325850 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 22:02:32 GMT Received: from d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u15M2W9p009650 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 15:02:32 -0700 Received: from oc7340732750.ibm.com (icon-9-164-151-10.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.164.151.10]) by d06av08.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id u15M2V3s009646; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 15:02:32 -0700 Received: by oc7340732750.ibm.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 081DC6BEA; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 23:02:30 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390: Add -fsplit-stack support To: koriakin@0x04.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Marcin_Ko=c5=9bcielnicki?=) Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 22:02:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: krebbel@linux.vnet.ibm.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <56B5106A.5040109@0x04.net> from "=?UTF-8?Q?Marcin_Ko=c5=9bcielnicki?=" at Feb 05, 2016 10:13:14 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20160205220231.081DC6BEA@oc7340732750.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 16020522-0025-0000-0000-000008DD879D X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00458.txt.bz2 Marcin Kościelnicki wrote: > I'll stay with checking for larl - while I can imagine someone adding a > new conditional branch instruction, I don't see a need for another > larl-like instruction. Besides, this way the failure mode for an > unknown instruction would be producing an error, instead of silently > emitting code with unfixed prologue. OK, fine with me. B.t.w. Andreas has checked in the sibcall fix, so you no longer should be seeing larl used for sibcalls. > I've updated and resubmitted the gold patch. Thanks! Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com