http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47893
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-25
17:39:36 UTC ---
I guess that would break pa, because then
else if (!STACK_ALIGNMENT_NEEDED)
{
...
}
will be executed whenever record_alignment_slots is false, even for non-zero
sizes or non-BLKmode.
Other than that, I think it would be better to change the bool argument into an
enum, after all we need just 3 variants, reduce_alignment_ok &&
record_alignment_slots (for caller-save), !reduce_alignment_ok &&
record_alignment_slots (for assign_stack_local) and !reduce_alignment_ok &&
!record_alignment_slots (for assign_stack_temp_for_type).
I'm currently running x86_64-linux and i686-linux bootstraps/regtests gathering
statistics, so far from the partial numbers I have a patch like that isn't
going to pessimize stuff too much, add_frame_space from within
assign_stack_temp_for_type accounts for like .5% of all add_frame_space calls
(and similarly in the number of bytes thus recorded).
