public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com>
Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [i386] Recompute the frame layout less often
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 18:11:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM4PR0701MB2162D3540559BE802A5C44C0E4E00@AM4PR0701MB2162.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFULd4ZuzueaKqCdKSZ_qEGLEVtH8r5BD-oTtRQxBEhME7gq0Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Daniel,

there is one thing I don't understand in your patch:
That is, it introduces a static value:

/* Registers who's save & restore will be managed by stubs called from
    pro/epilogue.  */
static HARD_REG_SET GTY(()) stub_managed_regs;

This seems to be set as a side effect of ix86_compute_frame_layout,
and depends on the register usage of the current function.
But values that depend on the current function need usually be
attached to cfun->machine, because the passes can run in parallel
unless I am completely mistaken, and the stub_managed_regs may
therefore be computed from a different function.


Bernd.

On 05/14/17 12:25, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On 05/14/2017 02:42 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> this patch uses the new TARGET_COMPUTE_FRAME_LAYOUT hook in the i386
>>> backend to avoid re-computing the frame layout when not really
>>> necessary.
>>>
>>> It simplifies the logic in ix86_compute_frame_layout by removing
>>> the use_fast_prologue_epilogue_nregs, which is no longer necessary,
>>> because the frame layout can no longer change spontaneously.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bootstrapped and reg-tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
>>> Is it OK for trunk?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Bernd.
>>
>>
>> I think Uros is about to commit my improvements to ms to sysv abi calls,
>> which is a large change and will conflict with your patch. I've added
>> several new fields to struct ix86_frame that will need to be merged (and
>> moved to i386.h).  I believe that my only explicit check of
>> crtl->stack_realign_finalized is during pro/epilogue expand, and not in
>> ix86_compute_frame_layout.  A former incarnation of my patches needed
>> ix86_compute_frame_layout to be called *after* it was set, but I believe
>> that is no longer the case, and so shouldn't conflict, but retesting should
>> certainly be done.
>
> Yes, the mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues patch was committed to mainline, please
> re-test and re-send the patch.
>
> Uros.
>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-14 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-14  9:11 Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-14  9:58 ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-14 10:27   ` Uros Bizjak
2017-05-14 18:11     ` Bernd Edlinger [this message]
2017-05-14 20:37       ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-15  2:23       ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-15 20:41         ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-15 23:52           ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-16  5:42             ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-16  8:52               ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-16 15:11                 ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-16 17:38               ` Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches
2017-05-16 20:10                 ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-16 21:05                   ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-17  2:12                   ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-17 17:43                     ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-18  7:05                       ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-18 13:48                     ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-19  3:13                       ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-22 18:32                         ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-23 14:34                           ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-24  6:49                             ` Daniel Santos
2017-06-01 16:06                             ` [PING][PATCH] " Bernd Edlinger
2017-06-01 18:18                             ` [PATCH] " Uros Bizjak
2017-05-23 23:01                           ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-16 21:35                 ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-17 18:41         ` Bernd Edlinger
2017-05-18  7:14           ` Daniel Santos
2017-05-19  5:12             ` Daniel Santos

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=AM4PR0701MB2162D3540559BE802A5C44C0E4E00@AM4PR0701MB2162.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de \
    --cc=daniel.santos@pobox.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=ubizjak@gmail.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).