PING: PATCH: PR target/70738: Add -mgeneral-regs-only option

PING: PATCH: PR target/70738: Add -mgeneral-regs-only option

[H.J. Lu]

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:00 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:54 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Here is a patch to add
>>>> -mgeneral-regs-only option to x86 backend.   We can update
>>>> spec for interrupt handle to recommend compiling interrupt handler
>>>> with -mgeneral-regs-only option and add a note for compiler
>>>> implementers.
>>>>
>>>> OK for trunk if there is no regression?
>>>
>>>
>>> I can't comment on the code patch, but for the documentation part:
>>>
>>>> @@ -24242,6 +24242,12 @@ opcodes, to mitigate against certain forms of
>>>> attack. At the moment,
>>>>  this option is limited in what it can do and should not be relied
>>>>  on to provide serious protection.
>>>>
>>>> +@item -mgeneral-regs-only
>>>> +@opindex mgeneral-regs-only
>>>> +Generate code which uses only the general-purpose registers.  This will
>>>
>>>
>>> s/which/that/
>>>
>>>> +prevent the compiler from using floating-point, vector, mask and bound
>>>
>>>
>>> s/will prevent/prevents/
>>>
>>>> +registers, but will not impose any restrictions on the assembler.
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe you mean to say "does not restrict use of those registers in inline
>>> assembly code"?  In any case, please get rid of the future tense here, too.
>>
>> I changed it to
>>
>> ---
>> @item -mgeneral-regs-only
>> @opindex mgeneral-regs-only
>> Generate code that uses only the general-purpose registers.  This
>> prevents the compiler from using floating-point, vector, mask and bound
>> registers.
>> ---
>>
>
> Here is the updated patch.  Tested on x86-64.  OK for trunk?
>

PING.

-- 
H.J.