From: Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco.Dijkstra@arm.com>
To: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
James Greenhalgh <James.Greenhalgh@arm.com>
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH][AArch64] PR60580: Fix frame pointer option magic
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 15:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DB6PR0801MB2053D1D2DB09C229125AE69C83B60@DB6PR0801MB2053.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
To fix PR60580 simplify the logic in aarch64_override_options_after_change_1 ().
If the frame pointer is enabled, set it to a special value that behaves similar
to frame pointer omission. If we don't do this all leaf functions will get a
frame pointer even if flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer is set.
If flag_omit_frame_pointer has this special value, we must force the frame
pointer if not in a leaf function. We also need to force it in a leaf function
if flag_omit_frame_pointer is not set or if LR is used.
Doing this allows both -fomit-frame-pointer and -fomit-leaf-frame-pointer to be
independently set and changed in each function with the expected behaviour.
OK for commit and backport to GCC7/GCC6?
ChangeLog:
2017-08-04 Wilco Dijkstra <wdijkstr@arm.com>
gcc/
PR middle-end/60580
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_frame_pointer_required)
Check special value of flag_omit_frame_pointer.
(aarch64_can_eliminate): Likewise.
(aarch64_override_options_after_change_1): Simplify handling of
-fomit-frame-pointer and -fomit-leaf-frame-pointer.
--
diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
index f90420bffe841155d2ea12dc7450fa699718e8ae..8ec196bca5e7203f2bb38381fe89b1aec43b9a29 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
@@ -2839,12 +2839,13 @@ aarch64_output_probe_stack_range (rtx reg1, rtx reg2)
static bool
aarch64_frame_pointer_required (void)
{
- /* In aarch64_override_options_after_change
- flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer turns off the frame pointer by
- default. Turn it back on now if we've not got a leaf
- function. */
- if (flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer
- && (!crtl->is_leaf || df_regs_ever_live_p (LR_REGNUM)))
+ /* Use the frame pointer if enabled and it is not a leaf function, unless
+ leaf frame pointer omission is disabled. If the frame pointer is enabled,
+ force the frame pointer in leaf functions which use LR. */
+ if (flag_omit_frame_pointer == 2
+ && !(flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer
+ && crtl->is_leaf
+ && !df_regs_ever_live_p (LR_REGNUM)))
return true;
/* Force a frame pointer for EH returns so the return address is at FP+8. */
@@ -5892,6 +5893,7 @@ aarch64_can_eliminate (const int from, const int to)
LR in the function, then we'll want a frame pointer after all, so
prevent this elimination to ensure a frame pointer is used. */
if (to == STACK_POINTER_REGNUM
+ && flag_omit_frame_pointer == 2
&& flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer
&& df_regs_ever_live_p (LR_REGNUM))
return false;
@@ -8914,24 +8916,16 @@ aarch64_parse_override_string (const char* input_string,
static void
aarch64_override_options_after_change_1 (struct gcc_options *opts)
{
- /* The logic here is that if we are disabling all frame pointer generation
- then we do not need to disable leaf frame pointer generation as a
- separate operation. But if we are *only* disabling leaf frame pointer
- generation then we set flag_omit_frame_pointer to true, but in
- aarch64_frame_pointer_required we return false only for leaf functions.
-
- PR 70044: We have to be careful about being called multiple times for the
- same function. Once we have decided to set flag_omit_frame_pointer just
- so that we can omit leaf frame pointers, we must then not interpret a
- second call as meaning that all frame pointer generation should be
- omitted. We do this by setting flag_omit_frame_pointer to a special,
- non-zero value. */
- if (opts->x_flag_omit_frame_pointer == 2)
- opts->x_flag_omit_frame_pointer = 0;
-
- if (opts->x_flag_omit_frame_pointer)
- opts->x_flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer = false;
- else if (opts->x_flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer)
+ /* PR 70044: We have to be careful about being called multiple times for the
+ same function. This means all changes should be repeatable. */
+
+ /* If the frame pointer is enabled, set it to a special value that behaves
+ similar to frame pointer omission. If we don't do this all leaf functions
+ will get a frame pointer even if flag_omit_leaf_frame_pointer is set.
+ If flag_omit_frame_pointer has this special value, we must force the
+ frame pointer if not in a leaf function. We also need to force it in a
+ leaf function if flag_omit_frame_pointer is not set or if LR is used. */
+ if (opts->x_flag_omit_frame_pointer == 0)
opts->x_flag_omit_frame_pointer = 2;
/* If not optimizing for size, set the default
next reply other threads:[~2017-08-04 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-04 15:46 Wilco Dijkstra [this message]
2017-08-15 16:27 ` Wilco Dijkstra
2017-10-24 16:23 ` James Greenhalgh
2017-10-24 17:12 ` Wilco Dijkstra
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=DB6PR0801MB2053D1D2DB09C229125AE69C83B60@DB6PR0801MB2053.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
--to=wilco.dijkstra@arm.com \
--cc=James.Greenhalgh@arm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=nd@arm.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).