On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:47 AM Fei Gao <gao...@eswincomputing.com> wrote: > > On 2023-09-05 20:02 Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> @@ -5569,7 +5571,9 @@ riscv_avoid_multi_push (const struct > >> riscv_frame_info *frame) > >> { > >> if (!TARGET_ZCMP || crtl->calls_eh_return || frame_pointer_needed > >> || cfun->machine->interrupt_handler_p || > >> cfun->machine->varargs_size != 0 > >> - || crtl->args.pretend_args_size != 0 || flag_shrink_wrap_separate > >> + || crtl->args.pretend_args_size != 0 > >> + || (use_shrink_wrapping_separate () > >> + && !riscv_avoid_shrink_wrapping_separate ()) > > > >I think we should also check "!optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun)" > >here, otherwise that does not really match what we claim in the commit > >message. > > > A similar check optimize_function_for_speed_p is included in > use_shrink_wrapping_separate of [1/2] allow targets to check > shrink-wrap-separate enabled or not. > > >e.g. it still will enable with -O2 -fno-shrink-wrap-separate > It's intentional to enable zcmp with -O2 -fno-shrink-wrap-separate. > Maybe I should have given a better commit message saying > "enable muti push and pop for Zcmp extension when > shrink-wrap-separate is inactive". > > Would you like a new patch from me or agree with my > explanation and modify commit message in your side?
Could you send a new patch with updated commit message. > > BR > Fei > > > >> || (frame->mask & ~MULTI_PUSH_GPR_MASK)) > >> return true; > >> >