On 12/1/2013, 7:57 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:11:26PM +0000, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Committed as rev. 205498.
2013-11-28 Vladimir Makarov<vmaka...@redhat.com>
PR target/57293
* ira.h (ira_setup_eliminable_regset): Remove parameter.
* ira.c (ira_setup_eliminable_regset): Ditto. Add
SUPPORTS_STACK_ALIGNMENT for crtl->stack_realign_needed.
Don't call lra_init_elimination.
(ira): Call ira_setup_eliminable_regset without arguments.
* loop-invariant.c (calculate_loop_reg_pressure): Remove argument
from ira_setup_eliminable_regset call.
* gcse.c (calculate_bb_reg_pressure): Ditto.
* haifa-sched.c (sched_init): Ditto.
* lra.h (lra_init_elimination): Remove the prototype.
* lra-int.h (lra_insn_recog_data): New member sp_offset. Move
used_insn_alternative upper.
(lra_eliminate_regs_1): Add one more parameter.
(lra-eliminate): Ditto.
* lra.c (lra_invalidate_insn_data): Set sp_offset.
(setup_sp_offset): New.
(lra_process_new_insns): Call setup_sp_offset.
(lra): Add argument to lra_eliminate calls.
* lra-constraints.c (get_equiv_substitution): Rename to get_equiv.
(get_equiv_with_elimination): New.
(process_addr_reg): Call get_equiv_with_elimination instead of
get_equiv_substitution.
(equiv_address_substitution): Ditto.
(loc_equivalence_change_p): Ditto.
(loc_equivalence_callback, lra_constraints): Ditto.
(curr_insn_transform): Ditto. Print the sp offset
(process_alt_operands): Prevent stack pointer reloads.
(lra_constraints): Remove one argument from lra_eliminate call.
Move it up. Mark used hard regs bfore it. Use
get_equiv_with_elimination instead of get_equiv_substitution.
* lra-eliminations.c (lra_eliminate_regs_1): Add parameter and
assert for param values combination. Use sp offset. Add argument
to lra_eliminate_regs_1 calls.
(lra_eliminate_regs): Add argument to lra_eliminate_regs_1 call.
(curr_sp_change): New static var.
(mark_not_eliminable): Add parameter. Update curr_sp_change.
Don't prevent elimination to sp if we can calculate its change.
Pass the argument to mark_not_eliminable calls.
(eliminate_regs_in_insn): Add a parameter. Use sp offset. Add
argument to lra_eliminate_regs_1 call.
(update_reg_eliminate): Move calculation of hard regs for spill
lower. Switch off lra_in_progress temporarily to generate regs
involved into elimination.
(lra_init_elimination): Rename to init_elimination. Make it
static. Set up insn sp offset, check the offsets at the end of
BBs.
(process_insn_for_elimination): Add parameter. Pass its value to
eliminate_regs_in_insn.
(lra_eliminate): : Add parameter. Pass its value to
process_insn_for_elimination. Add assert for param values
combination. Call init_elimination. Don't update offsets in
equivalence substitutions.
* lra-spills.c (assign_mem_slot): Don't call lra_eliminate_regs_1
for created stack slot.
(remove_pseudos): Call lra_eliminate_regs_1 before changing memory
onto stack slot.
2013-11-28 Vladimir Makarov<vmaka...@redhat.com>
PR target/57293
* gcc.target/i386/pr57293.c: New.
Hi Vlad,
This patch seems to cause some problems for AArch64. I see an assert
triggering when building libgloss:
/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/gcc1/gcc/xgcc
-B/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/gcc1/gcc/
-B/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/binutils/aarch64-none-elf/newlib/
-isystem
/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/binutils/aarch64-none-elf/newlib/targ-include
-isystem /work/gcc-clean/src/binutils/newlib/libc/include
-B/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/binutils/aarch64-none-elf/libgloss/aarch64
-L/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/binutils/aarch64-none-elf/libgloss/libnosys
-L/work/gcc-clean/src/binutils/libgloss/aarch64
-L/work/gcc-clean/build-aarch64-none-elf/obj/binutils/./ld -O2 -g -O2 -g -I.
-I/work/gcc-clean/src/binutils/libgloss/aarch64/.. -DARM_RDI_MONITOR -o
rdimon-_exit.o -c /work/gcc-clean/src/binutils/libgloss/aarch64/_exit.c
/work/gcc-clean/src/binutils/libgloss/aarch64/_exit.c: In function '_exit':
/work/gcc-clean/src/binutils/libgloss/aarch64/_exit.c:41:1: internal compiler
error: in update_reg_eliminate, at lra-eliminations.c:1157
}
Thanks, James. I'll try to reproduce it with the cross-compiler. I
expected that the patch might be disruptive. It is pretty big.
Therefore I started to work on it (and the related PRs) first. I'll try
to fix as soon as I can.
