public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Law <jlaw@tachyum.com>
Cc: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Aligning stack offsets for spills
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 16:55:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210608145501.GR7746@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1a10d2db-1867-5dfc-bf08-3b34557c85d4@tachyum.com>

On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 08:47:26AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > Why is the machinery involving STACK_SLOT_ALIGNMENT and
> > spill_slot_alignment() (for spilling) or get_stack_local_alignment() (for
> > backing stack slots) not working for you?  If everything is setup
> > correctly the input alignment to try_fit_stack_local ought to be correct
> > already.
> We don't need the MEM as a whole aligned, just the offset in the address
> calculation due to how we encode those instructions.  If I've read that code
> correctly, it would arrange for a dynamic realignment of the stack  so that
> it could then align the slot. None of that is necessary for us and we'd like
> to avoid forcing the dynamic stack realignment.  Or did I misread the code?

I think dynamic stack realignment is done only on x86, no other backend has
that support, on all the other arches larger alignments are done
in expand_stack_vars by effectively performing __builtin_alloca_with_align
for the block containing all such variables.
So I'd the the functions Michael mentioned shouldn't be doing dynamic stack
realignment, though perhaps by pretending the vars have higher alignment
might be recorded in MEM_ALIGN and perhaps might result in wrong-code if
something will try to e.g. test if least significant bits of certain MEM
address are 0.

	Jakub


  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-08 14:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-07 19:00 Jeff Law
2021-06-08  6:56 ` Richard Biener
2021-06-08 15:00   ` Jeff Law
2021-06-08 14:08 ` Michael Matz
2021-06-08 14:47   ` Jeff Law
2021-06-08 14:55     ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2021-06-08 15:06       ` H.J. Lu
2021-06-08 15:18         ` Jeff Law
2021-06-08 15:56           ` Michael Matz
2021-06-10 22:49       ` Jeff Law
2021-06-10 19:28 ` Peter Bergner
2021-06-10 21:34   ` Segher Boessenkool

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=20210608145501.GR7746@tucnak \
    --to=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jlaw@tachyum.com \
    --cc=matz@suse.de \
    /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).