public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Law <jlaw@ventanamicro.com>
To: Manolis Tsamis <manolis.tsamis@vrull.eu>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>,
	Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>,
	philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable shrink wrapping for the RISC-V target.
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 09:06:36 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4afcf3c0-690c-1168-b5e2-b6542b85d8e9@ventanamicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM3yNXpanKFLFz3JgVkmhxzvN4OVhPZ37dsHb6guuJLVM8HCjQ@mail.gmail.com>


On 11/2/22 07:54, Manolis Tsamis wrote:
>
> I've revisited this testcase and I think it's not possible to make it
> work with the current implementation.
> It's not possible to trigger shrink wrapping in this case since the
> wrapping of registers is guarded by
>   if (SMALL_OPERAND (offset)) { bitmap_set_bit (components, regno); }
> Hence if a long stack is generated we get no shrink wrapping.
>
> I also tried to remove that restriction but it looks like it can't
> work because we can't create
> pseudo-registers during shrink wrapping and shrink wrapping can't work either.
>
> I believe this means that shrink wrapping cannot interfere with a long
> stack frame
> so there is nothing to test against in this case?

It'd be marginally better to have such a test case to ensure we don't 
shrink wrap it -- that would ensure that someone doesn't accidentally 
introduce shrink wrapping with large offsets.   Just a bit of future 
proofing.


Jeff



  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-02 15:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-06 10:39 mtsamis
2022-10-02 20:32 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2022-10-18 15:18   ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-10-18 15:57     ` Jeff Law
2022-10-18 17:35       ` Palmer Dabbelt
2022-10-19 17:15         ` Jeff Law
2022-10-20  7:42           ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-11-02 14:12           ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-11-02 15:02             ` Jeff Law
2022-10-20  7:35         ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-11-02 13:54         ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-11-02 15:06           ` Jeff Law [this message]
2022-11-03  0:26             ` Palmer Dabbelt
2022-11-03 22:23               ` Jeff Law
2022-11-07 22:07                 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2022-11-13  1:32                   ` Jeff Law
2022-11-16 10:26                     ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-11-17  2:09                       ` Jeff Law
2022-11-17 10:54                         ` Manolis Tsamis
2022-11-17 11:59                           ` Philipp Tomsich

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=4afcf3c0-690c-1168-b5e2-b6542b85d8e9@ventanamicro.com \
    --to=jlaw@ventanamicro.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
    --cc=manolis.tsamis@vrull.eu \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu \
    --cc=vineetg@rivosinc.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).