https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21435
Reid Kleckner <r...@google.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #24 from Reid Kleckner <r...@google.com> ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Performance was never my worry here. Even with the crash fixed, it makes
> sense for us to continue using frame pointer. My main concern was the crash.
>
> So it looks you can resolve this bug after all!
OK, thanks for looking into it.
I think we'll mark this fixed then. If someone runs into the performance issue,
there are tons of workarounds: pass -fno-omit-frame-pointer, -mstackrealign,
-mstack-alignment=32, or whatever. Those all use a different codepath from
TargetOptions::StackAlignmentOverride, and should avoid the unaligned loads.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
