From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-93068-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 25011 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2004 16:47:32 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25004 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2004 16:47:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM) (217.40.111.177)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2004 16:47:31 -0000
Received: from mace ([192.168.1.25]) by NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0);
	 Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:46:44 +0000
From: "Dave Korn" <dk@artimi.com>
To: "'Joern Rennecke'" <joern.rennecke@superh.com>
Cc: <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: How can INITIAL_FRAME_POINTER_OFFSET be made correct?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:55:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <200403191558.i2JFwbC12451@linsvr1.uk.superh.com>
Message-ID: <NUTMEGFRaqbC8wSA1Xv000001ba@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2004 16:46:44.0984 (UTC) FILETIME=[C3579780:01C40DD1]
X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01149.txt.bz2

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joern Rennecke 
> Sent: 19 March 2004 15:59
> To: Dave Korn

> >   There's a bit of a problem, however.  
> regs_ever_live[LINK_REGNUM] is 
> > zero when INITIAL_FRAME_POINTER_OFFSET is called, but something has 
> > set it to one by the time we get to the emit prologue 
> function.  The 
> > result is that the two of them disagree about the size and 
> layout of 
> > my stackframes, and I get a lot of FAILs in the varargs tests.
> 
> Is LINK_RENUM eliminable, or can something else be eliminated to it?

There is no ELIMINABLE_REGS definition, but FRAME_POINTER_REQUIRED is zero
so gcc can do its default eliminate-lr-vs-sp.



    cheers, 
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....