On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> wrote: >> This patch tries to get safe lower and upper bounds where accesses >> are always guaranteed to work. The goal is not to penalize >> reasonable written code: When boot-strapping the whole GCC >> only a few places were found, where this new check triggers. >> >> Boot-strapped and regression-tested on x86_64-linux-gnu. >> Additionally built a cross compiler for a stack-grows-upward-target >> (xstormy16-elf). >> >> Ok for trunk? > > No, that's far too complicated a change for such a dumb artificial testcase. > > I have suspended the PR. I'd suggest concentrating on bug reports for real- > life software and/or new features, this would IMO be a better use of the time > you devote to GCC.
Btw, I wonder if we can simply mark the MEMs generated from spill code with MEM_NOTRAP_P so we can remove the special casing of frame-pointer-based addresses from add while properly initializing MEM_NOTRAP_p from rtx_addr_can_trap_p? I suppose it was added exactly to cover spill code? Otherwise I agree with Eric. Richard. > -- > Eric Botcazou
