On 03/21/2018 10:36 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Richard Sandiford
<richard.sandif...@linaro.org> wrote:
Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> writes:
On 03/20/2018 01:36 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
Hi.
This is a work-around to not iterate all members of array that can be huge.
As MPX will be removed in GCC 9.x, I hope it's acceptable. I don't want
to come
up with a new param for it.
Survives tests&bootstrap on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Martin
gcc/ChangeLog:
2018-03-20 Martin Liska <mli...@suse.cz>
PR target/84988
* tree-chkp.c (CHKP_ARRAY_MAX_CHECK_STEPS): Define a new macro.
(chkp_find_bound_slots_1): Limit number of iterations.
Or just CLOSE/WONTFIX :-)
I've got no objections here -- we want to minimize the effort put into
CHKP given its going to be deprecated.
The problem is that this affects normal configs, not just ones with
MPX enabled.
Indeed. It get's called via
#0 chkp_find_bound_slots_1 (type=0x7ffff69ee9d8, have_bound=0x2ed3868, offs=0)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/early-lto-debug/gcc/tree-chkp.c:1708
#1 0x0000000001379a13 in chkp_find_bound_slots (type=0x7ffff69ee9d8,
res=0x2ed3868)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/early-lto-debug/gcc/tree-chkp.c:1754
#2 0x0000000001377054 in chkp_type_bounds_count (type=0x7ffff69ee9d8)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/early-lto-debug/gcc/tree-chkp.c:1009
#3 0x00000000016c664f in ix86_function_arg_advance (cum_v=...,
mode=E_BLKmode, type=0x7ffff69ee9d8, named=true)
at /space/rguenther/src/svn/early-lto-debug/gcc/config/i386/i386.c:8621
8616 {
8617 /* Track if there are outgoing arguments on stack. */
8618 if (cum->caller)
8619 cfun->machine->outgoing_args_on_stack = true;
8620
8621 cum->bnds_in_bt = chkp_type_bounds_count (type);
8622 }
8623 }
8624
8625 /* Define where to put the arguments to a function.
but I think we know POINTER_BOUNDS_TYPE_P etc. never return
true if -fcheck-pointer-* or -mmpx is not enabled, right? So we can
guard the above call appropriately and save some compile-time
for all of us?
Good observation, let me enhance the patch for the PR.
Martin
Richard.
Thanks,
Richard
