public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Ross Ridge)
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: A proposal to align GCC stack
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071219091259.B7FDD73D10@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca> (raw)

H.J. Lu writes:
> What value did you use for -mpreferred-stack-boundary? The x86 backend
> defaults to 16byte.

On Windows the 16-byte default pretty much just wastes space, so I use
-mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 where it might make a difference.  In the
case where I wanted to use SSE vector instructions, I explicitly used
-mpreferred-stack-boundary=4 (16-byte alignment).

>STACK_BOUNDARY is the minimum stack boundary. MAX(STACK_BOUNDARY,
>PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY) == PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY.  So the question is
>if we should assume INCOMING == PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY in all cases:

Doing this would also remove need for ABI_STACK_BOUNDARY in your proposal.

>Pros:
>  1. Keep the current behaviour of -mpreferred-stack-boundary.
>
>Cons:
>  1. The generated code is incompatible with the other object files.

Well, your proposal wouldn't completely solve that problem, either.
You can't guarantee compatiblity with object files compiled with different
values -mpreferred-stack-boundary, including those compiled with current
implementation, unless you assume the incomming stack is aligned to
the lowest value the flag can have and align the outgoing stack to the
highest value that the flag can have.

						Ross Ridge

             reply	other threads:[~2007-12-19  9:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-12-19 10:06 Ross Ridge [this message]
2007-12-19 15:32 ` H.J. Lu
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-12-19 11:52 Ross Ridge
2007-12-19  9:13 Ross Ridge
2007-12-19 14:30 ` H.J. Lu
2007-12-19  3:51 Ross Ridge
2007-12-19 10:33 ` Andrew Pinski
2007-12-20  9:32   ` Ye, Joey
2007-12-20  9:11 ` Ye, Joey
2008-03-20 20:18 ` Ye, Joey
2007-12-19  1:46 Ross Ridge
2007-12-19  1:00 Ross Ridge
2007-12-19  1:53 ` Ye, Joey
2007-12-19  2:07 ` H.J. Lu
2007-12-18 23:31 Ross Ridge
2007-12-19  1:25 ` Robert Dewar
2007-12-19  2:18 ` H.J. Lu
2007-12-18 11:55 Ross Ridge
2007-12-18 16:14 ` H.J. Lu
2007-12-18  4:29 Ross Ridge
2007-12-18  6:15 ` H.J. Lu
2007-12-18  7:50   ` Ye, Joey
2007-12-18 13:52 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-12-18 18:05   ` H.J. Lu
2007-12-18 14:41 ` Robert Dewar
2007-12-18  4:25 Ye, Joey
2007-12-21 20:25 ` Christian Schüler

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=20071219091259.B7FDD73D10@caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
    --to=rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    /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).