On February 11, 2019 2:09:30 AM GMT+01:00, Hans-Peter Nilsson
<hans-peter.nils...@axis.com> wrote:
>Here's the follow-up, getting rid of the observed
>alignment-padding in execute/930126-1.c: the x parameter in f
>spuriously being runtime-aligned to BITS_PER_WORD. I separated
>this change because this is an older issue, a change introduced
>in r94104 where BITS_PER_WORD was chosen perhaps because we
>expect register-sized writes into this area. Here, we instead
>align to a minimum of PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY, but of course
>gated on ! STRICT_ALIGNMENT.
>
>Regtested cris-elf and x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
>
>Ok to commit?
>
>gcc:
> * function.c (assign_parm_setup_block): If not STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
> instead of always BITS_PER_WORD, align the stacked
> parameter to a minimum PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY.
>
>--- function.c.orig2 Sat Feb 9 00:53:17 2019
>+++ function.c Sat Feb 9 23:21:35 2019
>@@ -2912,7 +2912,10 @@ assign_parm_setup_block (struct assign_p
> size_stored = CEIL_ROUND (size, UNITS_PER_WORD);
> if (stack_parm == 0)
> {
>- SET_DECL_ALIGN (parm, MAX (DECL_ALIGN (parm), BITS_PER_WORD));
>+ HOST_WIDE_INT min_parm_align
>+ = STRICT_ALIGNMENT ? BITS_PER_WORD : PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY;
Shouldn't it be MIN (...) of BOTH?
>+
>+ SET_DECL_ALIGN (parm, MAX (DECL_ALIGN (parm), min_parm_align));
> if (DECL_ALIGN (parm) > MAX_SUPPORTED_STACK_ALIGNMENT)
> {
> rtx allocsize = gen_int_mode (size_stored, Pmode);
>
>brgds, H-P
