On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:29 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:14 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 12:08 PM, H.J. Lu <hongjiu...@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> Since DRAP is needed only if there are outgoing arguments on stack, we
>>>>> should track outgoing arguments on stack and avoid setting need_drap to
>>>>> true when there are no outgoing arguments on stack.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested on i686 and x86-64 with SSE2, AVX and AVX2. There is no
>>>>> regression. OK for trunk?
>>>>>
>>>>> H.J.
>>>>> ---
>>>>> gcc/
>>>>>
>>>>> PR target/81313
>>>>> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_function_arg_advance): Set
>>>>> outgoing_args_on_stack to true if there are outgoing arguments
>>>>> on stack.
>>>>> (ix86_function_arg): Likewise.
>>>>> (ix86_get_drap_rtx): Use DRAP only if there are outgoing
>>>>> arguments on stack and ACCUMULATE_OUTGOING_ARGS is false.
>>>>> * config/i386/i386.h (machine_function): Add
>>>>> outgoing_args_on_stack.
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -10473,6 +10479,10 @@ ix86_function_arg (cumulative_args_t cum_v,
>>>>> machine_mode omode,
>>>>> else
>>>>> arg = function_arg_32 (cum, mode, omode, type, bytes, words);
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* Track if there are outgoing arguments on stack. */
>>>>> + if (arg == NULL_RTX)
>>>>> + cfun->machine->outgoing_args_on_stack = true;
>>>>
>>>> This should be
>>>>
>>>> + /* Track if there are outgoing arguments on stack. */
>>>> + if (arg == NULL_RTX && cum->caller)
>>>> + cfun->machine->outgoing_args_on_stack = true;
>>>>
>>>> to check outgoing arguments for caller here.
>>>>
>>>>> return arg;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am testing updated patch with a new testcase.
>>>
>>> Updated patch LGTM.
>>>
>>> OK for mainline.
>>
>> Done. My patch will cause
>>
>> FAIL: gcc.dg/stack-layout-dynamic-1.c
>>
>> since on x86, now stack realignment is done with
>>
>> .cfi_startproc
>> pushl %ebp
>> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
>> .cfi_offset 5, -8
>> movl %esp, %ebp
>> .cfi_def_cfa_register 5
>> andl $-65536, %esp
>>
>> instead of
>>
>> .cfi_startproc
>> pushl %edi
>> .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
>> .cfi_offset 7, -8
>> leal 8(%esp), %edi
>> .cfi_def_cfa 7, 0
>> andl $-65536, %esp
>> pushl -4(%edi)
>> pushl %ebp
>> .cfi_escape 0x10,0x5,0x2,0x75,0
>> movl %esp, %ebp
>>
>> PR target/81313
>> * gcc.dg/stack-layout-dynamic-1.c (dg-options): Add -mregparm=3
>> for ia32.
>> Don't expect cfi_escape and expect cfi_def_cfa_register on x86.
>>
>> OK for trunk?
>
> Better use something like:
>
> --cut here--
> Index: stack-layout-dynamic-1.c
> ===================================================================
> --- stack-layout-dynamic-1.c (revision 250084)
> +++ stack-layout-dynamic-1.c (working copy)
> @@ -4,12 +4,12 @@
> /* { dg-options "-O0 -fomit-frame-pointer" } */
> /* { dg-require-effective-target ptr32plus } */
>
> -extern void bar (void *, void *, void *);
> +extern void bar (void *,void *, void *, void *, void *, void *, void *);
> void foo (void)
> {
> - int i;
> + int i, j, k, l, m;
> __attribute__ ((aligned(65536))) char runtime_aligned_1[512];
> __attribute__ ((aligned(32768))) char runtime_aligned_2[1024];
> - bar (&i, &runtime_aligned_1, &runtime_aligned_2);
> + bar (&i, &j, &k, &l, &m, &runtime_aligned_1, &runtime_aligned_2);
> }
> /* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "cfi_def_cfa_register" } } */
> --cut here--
>
> so the testcase will suppress new optimization and test what it was
> intended to test also on x86_64.
I will give it a try.
BTW, gcc.target/i386/pr59501-3a.c will fail the same way as
gcc.target/i386/pr59501-4a.c now since -mno-accumulate-outgoing-arg
works the same as -maccumulate-outgoing-args. A patch is posted at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00400.html
to fix it.
--
H.J.
