On 07/21/2016 09:07 AM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On 07/21/16 14:08, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On 07/21/16 13:35, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2016, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
On 07/21/16 13:25, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 07/21/2016 01:16 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:04:48AM +0000, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
bool
+gimple_alloca_call_p (const gimple *stmt)
+{
+ tree fndecl;
+
+ if (!is_gimple_call (stmt))
+ return false;
+
+ fndecl = gimple_call_fndecl (stmt);
+ if (fndecl && DECL_BUILT_IN_CLASS (fndecl) == BUILT_IN_NORMAL)
+ switch (DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (fndecl))
+ {
+ case BUILT_IN_ALLOCA:
+ case BUILT_IN_ALLOCA_WITH_ALIGN:
+ return true;
+ }
This should have failed bootstrap because of -Wswitch-enum.
You need
default:
break;
in.
+ switch (DECL_FUNCTION_CODE (fndecl))
+ {
+ case BUILT_IN_ALLOCA:
+ case BUILT_IN_ALLOCA_WITH_ALIGN:
+ return true;
Likewise here.
Or write it in the more natural way as an if.
I'm open for that suggestion.
Then I should probably also rewrite the switch statement
in special_function_p as an if.
I think a switch is a good fit though I don't mind an if as we probably
know we'll never get more than two alloca builtins (heh, you never know).
Thanks, style-nits are always welcome for me. I also do care about
that a lot.
I will keep the switch at the moment, and continue the boot-strap
with the approved version.
BTW: in the function below "is_tm_builtin" there is a single switch
in a block statement, we usually don't do that redundant braces...
Richard, do you still have objections against the builtin_setjmp patch
from https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg01225.html ?
No, I think it is ok, thus, approved as well. Good to see that
special_function_p cleaned up ;)
Yeah that was about time! But that function is still like a mine field.
And it looks like it has been waiting there for me, all these years ;)
Jeff has found a reference to "savectx" in Solaris10, so it is probably
not yet completely dead as I thought.
If we need to keep the handling of savectx in special_function_p, that
would mean there ought to be a new built-in function for savectx as
well IMO.
With that hint I have googled up a header file /usr/include/sys/proc.h
from 2002 where the function signature can be seen:
extern void savectx(kthread_t *);
But that is in a #ifdef _KERNEL block, which means it is a kernel
function.
It's possible the issue came up building the SunOS/Solaris kernel --
circa 1992 I was loosely involved in a project that was bringing up that
kernel on non-Sun hardware. And that fits my recollection of when
savectx support went into GCC.
jeff
