================
@@ -37,6 +38,11 @@ struct empty f_empty(struct empty x) { return x; }
// CHECK-LABEL: define{{.*}} i64 @f_emptyarr(i64 %x.coerce)
struct empty f_emptyarr(struct emptyarr x) { return x.a[0]; }
+// CHECK-LABEL: define{{.*}} i64 @f_emptystackarg(i64 %a0.coerce, i64
%a1.coerce, i64 %a2.coerce, i64 %a3.coerce, i64 %a4.coerce, i64 %a5.coerce,
%struct.empty %a6.coerce, %struct.empty %a7.coerce)
+struct empty f_emptystackarg(struct empty a0, struct empty a1, struct empty
a2, struct empty a3, struct empty a4, struct empty a5, struct empty a6, struct
empty a7) {
+ return a7;
+}
----------------
folkertdev wrote:
With this PR, clang gets that wrong, this is the status quo
https://godbolt.org/z/cfnfYbYbW
```c
struct E {};
float f(struct E, struct E, struct E, struct E,
struct E, struct E, struct E, float v) {
return v;
}
```
gives with clang
```asm
f:
fmovs %f15, %f0
retl
nop
```
and gcc
```asm
f:
save %sp, -176, %sp
return %i7+8
fmovs %f15, %f0
```
with this fix, compiled with `~/c/llvm-project/build/bin/clang -S foo.c -target
sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu -O1` I get
```asm
f: ! @f
! %bb.0: ! %entry
fmovs %f13, %f0
retl
nop
```
So, the wrong float register is used.
In the godbolt, if you add another `struct E` parameter the register used
changes, with your PR it stays the same.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/217065
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
