Eric Botcazou writes:
>> But why do we want the loop at all if the rounded size is zero?
>> It's a compile-time constant after all.
>
> Yes, this never occurs in practice because of the value set for
> PROBE_INTERVAL
> and STACK_CHECK_PROTECT. This can only occur in the dynamic case handled in
> But why do we want the loop at all if the rounded size is zero?
> It's a compile-time constant after all.
Yes, this never occurs in practice because of the value set for PROBE_INTERVAL
and STACK_CHECK_PROTECT. This can only occur in the dynamic case handled in
explow.c:probe_stack_range.
All
On Mon, 22 Oct 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > The loop probes at FIRST + N * PROBE_INTERVAL for values of N from 1 until
> > it
> > is equal to ROUNDED_SIZE, inclusive, so FIRST + SIZE is always probed.
>
> Doh! But in that case, rather than:
>
> 1:
> beq r1,r2,2f
> addiu
Sorry, one more thing (obviously a bad night)
Eric Botcazou writes:
> + if (TARGET_64BIT && TARGET_LONG64)
> + emit_insn (gen_probe_stack_rangedi (r3, r3, r12));
> + else
> + emit_insn (gen_probe_stack_rangesi (r3, r3, r12));
Please use:
emit_insn (PMODE_INSN (gen_probe_st
Eric Botcazou writes:
>> Doh! But in that case, rather than:
>>
>> 1:
>> beq r1,r2,2f
>> addiu r1,r1,interval
>> b 1b
>> sw $0,0(r1)
>> 2:
>>
>> why not just:
>>
>> 1:
>> addiu r1,r1,interval
>> bne r1,r2,1b
>> sw $0,0(r1)
>>
>> ?
> Doh! But in that case, rather than:
>
> 1:
> beq r1,r2,2f
> addiu r1,r1,interval
> b 1b
> sw $0,0(r1)
> 2:
>
> why not just:
>
> 1:
> addiu r1,r1,interval
> bne r1,r2,1b
> sw $0,0(r1)
>
> ?
The latter will always probe on
Eric Botcazou writes:
>> I Might Be Wrong, but it looks like this won't probe at FIRST + SIZE
>> in the case where SIZE == ROUNDED_SIZE, because the loop exits on that
>> value without probing it. Should the last line be unconditional,
>> or does the loop need to be a do-while instead? (I suppos
> This function doesn't work with MIPS16 mode. Maybe just:
>
> if (TARGET_MIPS16)
> sorry ("MIPS16 stack probes");
>
> (We can't test TARGET_MIPS16 in something like STACK_CHECK_STATIC_BUILTIN
> because MIPS16ness is a per-function property.)
I put
if (TARGET_MIPS16)
sorry ("-fstac
Eric Botcazou writes:
> This implements static stack checking for MIPS, i.e. checking of the static
> part of the frame in the prologue when -fstack-check is specified. This is
> very similar to the PowerPC and SPARC implementations and makes it possible
> to
> pass the full ACATS testsuite w
This implements static stack checking for MIPS, i.e. checking of the static
part of the frame in the prologue when -fstack-check is specified. This is
very similar to the PowerPC and SPARC implementations and makes it possible to
pass the full ACATS testsuite with -fstack-check.
Tested on mips
10 matches
Mail list logo
