On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Jiangning Liu <jiangning....@arm.com> wrote: > This patch is fix PR38644, a 3-year-old bug. > > From the discussions in mail list and bugzilla, I think the middle end fix > is a common view. Although there are stills some gaps on how to fix it in > middle end, I think this patch at least moves the problem from back-end to > middle-end, which makes GCC infrastructure stronger than before. Otherwise, > any back-end needs to "find" and fix this problem by itself.
I don't see why you think that is the common view that the fix should be in the middle-end. I and a few others think the back-end should be where the barrier emitted from. The middle-end should not have stack accesses as being special in anyway when it comes down to scheduling. What happens when a new scheduler comes around? Then this has to be fixed again in that new scheduler rather than having the barrier doing the correct thing for all schedulers. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
