On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 08:06:07AM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 01/15/2014 01:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 01:43:18PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr54694.c
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
> >> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> >> +/* { dg-options "-O" } */
> >> +
> >> +register void *hfp __asm__("%ebp"); /* { dg-message "note: for" } */
> >
> > Shouldn't that be %rbp for x86_64? Or do we treat it the same?
>
> We treat it the same.
BTW, your fix broke the gcc.target/i386/pr9771-1.c
test on i686-linux, the problem is that main normally dynamically realigns
the stack. Wonder if the test should be turned into dg-do compile,
or perhaps a hack like:
int xmain() __asm__ ("main");
int xmain()
instead of
int main()
to avoid the dynamic stack realigning in main (limit the test to *linux*
then?), supply main written in assembly, something else?
Jakub
