public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dominik Vogt <vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt@redhat.com>, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>,
	       gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
	Andreas Krebbel <krebbel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	       Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com>,
	       Andreas Arnez <arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] Allocate constant size dynamic stack space in the prologue
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:44:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160711114412.GA6171@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160707115716.GA14409@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 12:57:16PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 02:01:06PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > There's one thing I don't quite understand and which seems to have
> > changed since v1:
> > 
> > On 07/04/2016 02:19 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > >@@ -1099,8 +1101,10 @@ expand_stack_vars (bool (*pred) (size_t), struct stack_vars_data *data)
> > >
> > >       /* If there were any, allocate space.  */
> > >       if (large_size > 0)
> > >-	large_base = allocate_dynamic_stack_space (GEN_INT (large_size), 0,
> > >-						   large_align, true);
> > >+	{
> > >+	  large_allocsize = GEN_INT (large_size);
> > >+	  get_dynamic_stack_size (&large_allocsize, 0, large_align, NULL);
> > >+	}
> > >     }
> > >
> > >   for (si = 0; si < n; ++si)
> > >@@ -1186,6 +1190,19 @@ expand_stack_vars (bool (*pred) (size_t), struct stack_vars_data *data)
> > > 	  /* Large alignment is only processed in the last pass.  */
> > > 	  if (pred)
> > > 	    continue;
> > >+
> > >+	  if (large_allocsize && ! large_allocation_done)
> > >+	    {
> > >+	      /* Allocate space the virtual stack vars area in the
> > >+	         prologue.  */
> > >+	      HOST_WIDE_INT loffset;
> > >+
> > >+	      loffset = alloc_stack_frame_space
> > >+		(INTVAL (large_allocsize),
> > >+		 PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY / BITS_PER_UNIT);
> > >+	      large_base = get_dynamic_stack_base (loffset, large_align);
> > >+	      large_allocation_done = true;
> > >+	    }
> > > 	  gcc_assert (large_base != NULL);
> > >
> > 
> > Why is this code split between the two places here?
> 
> This is a bugfix from v1 to v2.
> I think I had to move this code to the second loop so that the
> space for dynamically aligned variables is allocated at the "end"
> of the space for stack variables.  I cannot remember what the bug
> was, but maybe it was that the variables with fixed and static
> alignment ended up at the same address.
> 
> Anyway, now that the new allocation strategy is used
> unconditionally, it should be possible to move the
> get_dynamic_stack_size call down to the second loop and simplify
> the code somewhat.  I'll look into that.

Version 5 with some code moved from the first loop to the second.

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

-- 

Dominik Vogt
IBM Germany

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-11 11:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-25 13:17 [PATCH] " Dominik Vogt
2015-11-25 13:33 ` Bernd Schmidt
2015-11-25 14:54   ` Dominik Vogt
2015-11-25 15:06     ` Bernd Schmidt
2015-11-27 14:13       ` Dominik Vogt
2015-11-27 14:24         ` Dominik Vogt
2015-12-02 19:05         ` Jeff Law
2015-12-03  0:16           ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-05-06  9:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Dominik Vogt
2016-05-06  9:44   ` Dominik Vogt
2016-06-20 11:09     ` [PATCH v2, PING 1] " Dominik Vogt
2016-06-23  4:46     ` [PATCH v2] " Jeff Law
2016-06-23 15:48       ` Dominik Vogt
2016-06-24 12:40         ` Dominik Vogt
2016-07-04 12:20           ` Dominik Vogt
2016-07-04 14:09             ` Andreas Krebbel
2016-07-06 12:01             ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-07-07 11:57               ` Dominik Vogt
2016-07-11 11:44                 ` Dominik Vogt [this message]
2016-07-13 22:12                   ` [PATCH v5] " Jeff Law
2016-07-14  9:11                     ` Dominik Vogt
2016-07-15 11:51                       ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-07-15 12:05                         ` Dominik Vogt
2016-07-15 12:22                           ` Dominik Vogt
2016-07-15 13:18                             ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-07-18 13:11                             ` Andreas Krebbel
2016-06-23  4:43   ` [PATCH v2] " Jeff Law

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=20160711114412.GA6171@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=vogt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=bschmidt@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=krebbel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=law@redhat.com \
    /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: link
Be 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).