On 08/19/2017 12:22 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 07/30/2017 11:35 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> This patch introduces the stack clash protection options
>>
>> Changes since V2:
>>
>> Adds two new params. The first controls the size of the guard area.
>> This controls the threshold for when a function prologue requires
>> probes. The second controls the probing interval -- ie, once probes are
>> needed, how often do we emit them. These are really meant more for
>> developers to experiment with than users. Regardless I did go ahead and
>> document them./PARAM
>>
>> It also adds some sanity checking WRT combining stack clash protection
>> with -fstack-check.
>
> Just a minor nit and suggestion:
>
> "supproted" -> "supported"
>
> + warning_at (UNKNOWN_LOCATION, 0,
> + "-fstack-clash_protection is not supproted on targets "
> + "where the stack grows from lower to higher addresses");
>
> and quote the name of the options in diagnostics, i.e., use either
>
> "%<"-fstack-clash_protection%> ..."
>
> or
>
> "%qs is not supported...", "-fstack-clash_protection"
>
> as you did in error ("value of parameter %qs must be a power of 2",
> ompiler_params[i].option);
>
> Likewise in
>
> + warning_at (UNKNOWN_LOCATION, 0,
> + "-fstack-check= and -fstack-clash_protection are mutually "
> + "exclusive. Disabling -fstack-check=");
Thanks. I settled on the %< %> style. None of the other warnings in
that area use either. Otherwise I would have just selected whatever was
most commonly used in that code.
jeff
