https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #20 from Andrew Pinski ---
New patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-May/650757.html
It was simplier than I had expected too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #58043|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #17)
> So I don't believe you should change aarch64_pop_regs at all - it's too late
> to change things and just adds unnecessary complexity and more bugs. The
> best option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #17 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #16)
> Patch posted with all of the testcases included:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-April/650080.html
Not nearly enough testcases... What about:
void
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #16 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patch posted with all of the testcases included:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-April/650080.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 58043
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58043=edit
Patch but no testcases yet
Will add testcases in a little bit. Also I have not tested this fully yet. Will
do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/gnustep/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #13 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #11)
> I have a fix for aarch64, able to produce now:
> ```
> f:
> .LFB0:
> .cfi_startproc
> stp x0, x1, [sp, -32]!
> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 32
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #10)
> Since the whole eh_return is an internal ABI in libgcc, a fix would be to
> change EH_RETURN_DATA_REGNO(N) to avoid x0 and x1. Since eh_return already
> reserves 7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114843
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Just an FYI on other targets on my reduced testcase (I just quickly looked
> at the generated assembly to see if it worked or not):
>
> backends that seems to
13 matches
Mail list logo
