> Under which circumstances are there missing functions in the cgraph?
When the RTL expander calls library routines, there are no traces of them in
the IPA callgraph.
--
Eric Botcazou
Attached is a patch with some experiments of mine.
On Tue, 10 May 2016 01:17:37 +0200
Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Wishes:
> > - Add stack-usage in output of -fdump-ipa-cgraph, so that you don't need to
> > relate information from two input files at all. I guess this is not
>
> I'll take a look.
Thanks. The stack usage reported through current_function_static_stack_size
by the back-end must comprise the amount of stack from just before the call to
after the stack is established. For example on i386:
eric@polaris:> cat t.c
int main (void)
{
return 0;
}
Eric Botcazou writes:
>> Output of -fstack-usage is not accurate
>> ===
>>
>> This article mentions a "call cost":
>> https://mcuoneclipse.com/2015/08/21/gnu-static-stack-usage-analysis/
>>
>> I checked for myself, by looking at the change of the
> Output of -fstack-usage is not accurate
> ===
>
> This article mentions a "call cost":
> https://mcuoneclipse.com/2015/08/21/gnu-static-stack-usage-analysis/
>
> I checked for myself, by looking at the change of the stackpointer with a
> debugger, and, yes,
Hi,
sorry for reopening a very old thread, it took some time until I got around to
write a script that parses the output of -fdump-ipa-cgraph and -fstack-usage.
I'm using gcc 5.3 currently.
It's mostly what I need, I get all the information about the callgraph that I
wanted to get (what's
-Original Message-
From: Eric Botcazou [mailto:ebotca...@adacore.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:43 PM
To: sebastianspublicaddr...@googlemail.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Joe Buck
Subject: Re: show size of stack needed by functions
We have had something along these lines
Sebastian sebastianspublicaddr...@googlemail.com writes:
can gcc show the size of the stackframe of functions, so you can, given
a callgraph without cycles, calculate the worst case stack size?
(Assuming no use of alloca or C99 variable size arrays)
Can gcc (or ld) dump a callgraph?
The
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Sebastian
sebastianspublicaddr...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
can gcc show the size of the stackframe of functions, so you can, given
GCC 4.6.0 has -fstack-usage.
--
H.J.
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 H.J. Lu wrote:
GCC 4.6.0 has -fstack-usage.
Thanks. That's probably the reason I didn't find it in current manuals.
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
The mailing list gcc@gcc.gnu.org is for the development of gcc itself.
This question would be more appropriate
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 02:43:18PM -0700, Sebastian wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 H.J. Lu wrote:
gcc can not dump a callgraph. Both GNU ld and gold can dump a
cross-reference table, which is not a call graph but could perhaps be
used to produce a call graph. See the --cref option.
--cref
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Joe Buck joe.b...@synopsys.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 02:43:18PM -0700, Sebastian wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 H.J. Lu wrote:
gcc can not dump a callgraph. Both GNU ld and gold can dump a
cross-reference table, which is not a call graph but could
Am Mittwoch, den 13.10.2010, 14:54 -0700 schrieb Joe Buck:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 02:43:18PM -0700, Sebastian wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 H.J. Lu wrote:
gcc can not dump a callgraph. Both GNU ld and gold can dump a
cross-reference table, which is not a call graph but could perhaps be
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Sebastian
sebastianspublicaddr...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 H.J. Lu wrote:
GCC 4.6.0 has -fstack-usage.
Thanks. That's probably the reason I didn't find it in current manuals.
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
The mailing list
Of course, the compiler can't dump the callgraph of the whole program.
But it could dump the list of functions called by every function of a
translation unit. With annotations which of the calls are inlined. Which
could then be processed by a script to get the whole callgraph.
We have had
Sebastian sebastianspublicaddr...@googlemail.com writes:
I think, the reason that the linker only gives a list of referenced
symbols per file name, and not per function, is that it can't do better.
I doesn't know where the code of a function starts and ends. Does it?
It does, at least when
Apologies for continuing the somewhat off-topic thread...
Sebastian sebastianspublicaddr...@googlemail.com writes:
Static analysis which work on source code are not ideal, either. They
don't know which functions will be inlined by the compiler.
I'm pretty sure that the Linux kernel developers
17 matches
Mail list logo