From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
Cc: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add __builtin_stack_top
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOqKEJjTzP1jmzZ1tnZm9a1TXKSsUfnfw4OexNFNxfVPog@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9652D8E5-C3B2-4C88-BC34-4591962D42D1@comcast.net>
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Aug 4, 2015, at 8:44 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> On Aug 4, 2015, at 5:30 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Where does this feature belong?
>>>
>>> I prefer the middle end.
>>
>> Any comments on my middle-end patch?
>
> So, if the answer is the same as frame_address (0), why not have the fallback just expand to that? Then, one can use this builtin everywhere that frame address is used today. People that want a faster, tighter port can then implement the hook and achieve higher performance.
The motivation of __builtin_stack_top is that frame_address requires a
frame pointer register, which isn't desirable for x86. __builtin_stack_top
doesn't require a frame pointer register.
--
H.J.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-04 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-04 12:31 H.J. Lu
2015-08-04 15:42 ` Mike Stump
2015-08-04 15:44 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-04 17:18 ` Mike Stump
2015-08-04 17:28 ` H.J. Lu [this message]
2015-08-04 17:43 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-04 18:50 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-04 18:51 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-04 19:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-04 20:00 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-04 20:45 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-04 20:50 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 12:29 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 12:57 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-19 13:03 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 15:31 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 17:08 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-19 17:11 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 17:53 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-19 19:13 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 22:06 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 22:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2015-08-19 22:35 ` H.J. Lu
2015-08-19 22:55 ` 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=CAMe9rOqKEJjTzP1jmzZ1tnZm9a1TXKSsUfnfw4OexNFNxfVPog@mail.gmail.com \
--to=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=mikestump@comcast.net \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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).