https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84521
--- Comment #18 from ramana.radhakrishnan at foss dot arm.com --- On 07/03/2018 18:59, sudi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84521 > > --- Comment #17 from sudi at gcc dot gnu.org --- > I looked up what other targets were doing and one thing found to be > interesting > was that a lot of them are defining the target hook > TARGET_BUILTIN_SETJMP_FRAME_VALUE. In AArch64 case I am suggesting to define > it > to return the hard frame pointer. That seems to solve the issue with both the > attached test case and the test that Wilco mentioned. > > Does this look like it solves "mid-end versus back-end : who fixes this issue" > problem? > > I am still pretty new to knowing how the stack should actually look. So > calling > for some help! > > Sudi > That looks sensible. Especially see the comment in arc/arc.c - that seems to mirror the decision we want in AArch64 as well. The logic / comment around this in the arc port seems quite reasonable to me and looks like what we can have on AArch64 as well. Ramana
