On 03/12/2020 12:28, Andrea Corallo wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw <Richard.Earnshaw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On 03/12/2020 11:47, Andrea Corallo via Gcc-help wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've a piece of code that reduced looks like this:
>>>
>>> #+begin_src C
>>> typedef struct {
>>> void (*fun_ptr)(void);
>>> } x_t;
>>>
>>> x_t *x;
>>>
>>> void
>>> f (void)
>>> {
>>> const x_t const *y = x;
>>> for (int i = 0; i < 1000; ++i)
>>> y->fun_ptr ();
>>> }
>>> #+end_src
>>>
>>> What is the correct way (if any) to express to the compiler that the
>>> value of y->fun_ptr does not get clobbered by the function call itself
>>> so the corresponding load to obtain its value can be moved out of the
>>> loop?
>>>
>>> My understanding is that the const qualifier is more for diagnostic
>>> reasons and is not sufficient for GCC to make this assumption. OTOH I
>>> cannot give 'fun_ptr' the attribute pure as it's not.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>
>> Why not just put the function pointer in a local variable? Then the
>> compiler will know that the value can't change.
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> yeah that would do the job.
>
> This is generated code and changing the code generator that way might
> not be completely trivial (e.g. where is the best position to perform
> the assignments to each local variable?). Therefore before going for
> this solution I'd like to be convinced there's no way to express this
> directly to GCC.
>
> Andrea
>
Perhaps you could declare y with the restrict qualifier? But that would
need to apply to all of *y, not just fun_ptr.
R.
