Re: [PATCH] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation

2016-04-28 Thread H.J. Lu
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/30/2015 03:35 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> >> On 11/29/2015 06:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> >>> Is this safe for stage 3? >> >> >> Is there a reason to do it now? This doesn't include a testcase. > > Handling the proposed attribute requires exte

Re: [PATCH] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation

2016-04-28 Thread Jeff Law
On 11/30/2015 03:35 AM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: On 11/29/2015 06:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: Is this safe for stage 3? Is there a reason to do it now? This doesn't include a testcase. Handling the proposed attribute requires extensions to the current function_arg capabilities. I need to go back to t

Re: [PATCH] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation

2015-11-30 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 11/29/2015 06:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: Is this safe for stage 3? Is there a reason to do it now? This doesn't include a testcase. * function.c (assign_parm_setup_stack): Force source into a register if needed. * target.def (function_incoming_arg): Update documentation

[PATCH] Update TARGET_FUNCTION_INCOMING_ARG documentation

2015-11-29 Thread H.J. Lu
On x86, interrupt handlers are only called by processors which push interrupt data onto stack at the address where the normal return address is. Since interrupt handlers must access interrupt data via pointers so that they can update interrupt data, the pointer argument is passed as "argument poin