http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49815
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-22 14:37:50 UTC --- > Ah, I see. adjust_insn call isn't guarded by MAY_HAVE_DEBUG_STMTS, therefore > if -fvar-tracking-assignments gives up due to insanely large hash tables, it > won't be reset during vt_finalize. My assumption as well. > BTW, wouldn't it be better to model the insn completely rather than partially? > In particular, in addition to the arguments being copied have also the > copy/clobber for all the other arguments, except for the sp = sp - something > which would be another set. What other arguments? Does vt_add_function_parameters not see them all? I'm not sure I understand the need to model the stack decrement either given that the CFA register is the frame pointer.
