https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #15 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: trippels
Date: Wed Jul 29 06:32:09 2015
New Revision: 226338
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226338root=gccview=rev
Log:
Use fast unwinder for PowerPC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Argh, sorry, Markus. Thanks for fixing it up.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #8)
Patch submitted as http://reviews.llvm.org/D11552.
Wow. Very nice speedup for such a simple patch.
Would be great if could be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Wed Jul 29 03:33:10 2015
New Revision: 226335
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226335root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-07-28 Bill Schmidt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #10)
The fix was accepted and committed upstream in the LLVM compiler-rt project.
Jakub, is applying this patch to GCC's libsanitizer ok?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #10 from Bill Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The fix was accepted and committed upstream in the LLVM compiler-rt project.
Jakub, is applying this patch to GCC's libsanitizer ok?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The numbers above are seconds.
Perf shows:
29.44% a.out libgcc_s.so.1 [.] uw_update_context_1
13.08% a.out libasan.so.2.0.0[.]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
PowerPC is the only target with an abi that can backtrace correctly without a
frame pointer so it should be easy to implement that.
Even x86 is broken backtracking without a frame
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Right, but it is a library change, so somebody has to code it up, test and push
upstream first, then we can cherry-pick it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #4 from Kostya Serebryany kcc at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Why can't we use frame pointers on PPC?
So far I have not seen any implementation of unwinder not based on FPs
that was fast enough for ASan.
ASan unwinds the stack on every
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #4)
Why can't we use frame pointers on PPC?
You don't need to use the frame pointer. The ABI says the stack frame always
contains a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
See: http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi-1.9.html#STACK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63927
Kostya Serebryany kcc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
17 matches
Mail list logo
