From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Olivier Hainque <hainque@adacore.com>, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: rs6000 stack_tie mishap again
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 17:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56F41B44.1080003@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C2CF6AE-FEBC-40B8-B055-F51246F8854B@adacore.com>
On 03/24/2016 02:17 AM, Olivier Hainque wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> So, aside from the dependency issue which needs to be fixed somehow, I
>>> think it would make sense to consider using a strong blockage mecanism in
>>> expand_epilogue.
>>
>> That's what we both said here
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01180.html
>>
>> and David agreed too
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-11/msg01842.html
>>
>> but if you can have the alias analysis changes accepted that would be
>> even better.
>
> I'd really like to come to a resolution we're confident is robust,
> because these are really very nasty bugs.
The robust solution is to have a scheduling barrier just before the
point where the stack is deallocated.
The alternative some folks have suggested would be for the generic parts
of the compiler to add the scheduling barrier before the stack pointer
adjustment. I wouldn't object to that.
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-24 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-23 16:24 Olivier Hainque
2016-03-24 7:51 ` Alan Modra
2016-03-24 10:32 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-03-24 17:00 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2016-03-28 19:58 ` Richard Henderson
2016-04-08 8:25 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-04-08 15:37 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-04-08 16:01 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-04-11 10:15 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-04-14 15:47 ` Andreas Krebbel
2016-04-14 16:50 ` Jeff Law
2016-04-14 17:10 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-04-15 4:37 ` Andreas Krebbel
2016-04-15 7:43 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-04-15 16:42 ` Jeff Law
2016-04-15 17:05 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-04-15 17:26 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-04-14 22:42 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-04-15 15:17 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-03-28 4:48 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-03-28 11:23 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-03-28 12:44 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-03-30 9:40 ` Olivier Hainque
2016-03-30 15:15 ` Alan Modra
2016-03-23 17:42 David Edelsohn
2016-03-24 8:17 ` Alan Modra
2016-03-24 10:17 ` Olivier Hainque
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=56F41B44.1080003@redhat.com \
--to=law@redhat.com \
--cc=amodra@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hainque@adacore.com \
--cc=rth@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).