On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Michael Matz <m...@suse.de> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2017, Uros Bizjak wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 9:40 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > When there is no stack access, there is no need to use frame pointer >> > even if -fno-omit-frame-pointer is used. >> > >> > Tested on i686 and x86-64. OK for trunk? >> >> LGTM. > > This will break unwinders relying on frame pointers to exist on all > functions, for which projects conciously forced a frame pointer with this > option. I don't think we can simply override user specified explicit > wishes in this way, presumably they had a reason to use it.
Hm... yes, you are right. HJ, please revert the patch. Thanks, Uros.
