On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 9:47 AM Fei Gao <gao...@eswincomputing.com> wrote:
>
> On 2023-09-05 20:02 Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> @@ -5569,7 +5571,9 @@ riscv_avoid_multi_push (const struct
> >> riscv_frame_info *frame)
> >> {
> >> if (!TARGET_ZCMP || crtl->calls_eh_return || frame_pointer_needed
> >> || cfun->machine->interrupt_handler_p ||
> >> cfun->machine->varargs_size != 0
> >> - || crtl->args.pretend_args_size != 0 || flag_shrink_wrap_separate
> >> + || crtl->args.pretend_args_size != 0
> >> + || (use_shrink_wrapping_separate ()
> >> + && !riscv_avoid_shrink_wrapping_separate ())
> >
> >I think we should also check "!optimize_function_for_size_p (cfun)"
> >here, otherwise that does not really match what we claim in the commit
> >message.
> >
> A similar check optimize_function_for_speed_p is included in
> use_shrink_wrapping_separate of [1/2] allow targets to check
> shrink-wrap-separate enabled or not.
>
> >e.g. it still will enable with -O2 -fno-shrink-wrap-separate
> It's intentional to enable zcmp with -O2 -fno-shrink-wrap-separate.
> Maybe I should have given a better commit message saying
> "enable muti push and pop for Zcmp extension when
> shrink-wrap-separate is inactive".
>
> Would you like a new patch from me or agree with my
> explanation and modify commit message in your side?
Could you send a new patch with updated commit message.
>
> BR
> Fei
> >
> >> || (frame->mask & ~MULTI_PUSH_GPR_MASK))
> >> return true;
> >>
>
