pzheng added a comment.

In D100509#2692127 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509#2692127>, @xbolva00 wrote:

>>> <source_file>:<line_number>:<function_name> <size_in_byte> <static/dynamic>
>
> gcc also supports "bounded" - do you plan to somehow handle it? 
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Developer-Options.html#Developer-Options),
>  eg: parser.c:918:5:parse_statement  48      dynamic,bounded

I actually tried some test cases using GCC and never got it to output 
"dynamic,bounded." So, not sure how (or when) GCC actually determines a 
function is dynamic, but bounded. Any idea?



================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/stack-usage.c:7
+// RUN: FileCheck %s < %T/b.su
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple arm-unknown -fstack-usage -fstack-usage=%T/c.su 
-emit-obj %s -o %T/c.o
+// RUN: FileCheck %s < %T/c.su
----------------
xbolva00 wrote:
> -fstack-usage=file.su is Clang only, right? Tried with GCC, gcc error: 
> unrecognized command-line option ‘-fstack-usage=xxx’,
> 
> Do we need to also specify extra -fstack-usage if -fstack-usage=file.su  is 
> used? Seems quite redudant and -fstack-usage=file.su alone should be enough.
Yes, -fstack-usage=file.su is Clang only and it is only a cc1 option, **not ** 
a driver option. The main reason why I added both flags is to distinguish 
between the case where the user specified "-o" and the case where "-o" is not 
specified.

If only -fstack-usage is passed to cc1, we know the user did not pass "-o" on 
the command line and the name (with the extension removed) of the source file 
should be used to name the .su file. For example, with "clang -fstack-usage -c 
foo.c", foo.su is generated.

If both -fstack-usage and -fstack-usage= are present, we know the user 
specified "-o" and the name of the .su file should be based on that name 
instead. For example, with "clang -fstack-usage -c foo.c -o bar.o", bar.su is 
generated instead of foo.su.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D100509

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to