Use function attributes to indicate that we don't want to realign the stack.

Function attributes are the future! So just query whether we want to realign the
stack directly from the function instead of through a random target options
structure.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@187618 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

4 files changed, 7 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp
index 80cfb5e..0703df0 100644
--- a/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp
@@ -60,7 +60,8 @@ MachineFunction::MachineFunction(const Function *F, const TargetMachine &TM,
     RegInfo = 0;
 
   MFInfo = 0;
-  FrameInfo = new (Allocator) MachineFrameInfo(TM, TM.Options.RealignStack);
+  FrameInfo =
+    new (Allocator) MachineFrameInfo(TM,!F->hasFnAttribute("no-realign-stack"));
 
   if (Fn->getAttributes().hasAttribute(AttributeSet::FunctionIndex,
                                        Attribute::StackAlignment))
diff --git a/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp b/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp
index 9274baf..58c06e3 100644
--- a/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp
+++ b/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ bool ARMBaseRegisterInfo::canRealignStack(const MachineFunction &MF) const {
   // 1. Dynamic stack realignment is explicitly disabled,
   // 2. This is a Thumb1 function (it's not useful, so we don't bother), or
   // 3. There are VLAs in the function and the base pointer is disabled.
-  if (!MF.getTarget().Options.RealignStack)
+  if (MF.getFunction()->hasFnAttribute("no-realign-stack"))
     return false;
   if (AFI->isThumb1OnlyFunction())
     return false;
diff --git a/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp b/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp
index b762a57..adba613 100644
--- a/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp
+++ b/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp
@@ -717,7 +717,7 @@ bool PPCRegisterInfo::hasBasePointer(const MachineFunction &MF) const {
 }
 
 bool PPCRegisterInfo::canRealignStack(const MachineFunction &MF) const {
-  if (!MF.getTarget().Options.RealignStack)
+  if (MF.getFunction()->hasFnAttribute("no-realign-stack"))
     return false;
 
   return true;
diff --git a/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp b/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp
index c6655f7..0923310 100644
--- a/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp
+++ b/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp
@@ -411,10 +411,11 @@ bool X86RegisterInfo::hasBasePointer(const MachineFunction &MF) const {
 }
 
 bool X86RegisterInfo::canRealignStack(const MachineFunction &MF) const {
+  if (MF.getFunction()->hasFnAttribute("no-realign-stack"))
+    return false;
+
   const MachineFrameInfo *MFI = MF.getFrameInfo();
   const MachineRegisterInfo *MRI = &MF.getRegInfo();
-  if (!MF.getTarget().Options.RealignStack)
-    return false;
 
   // Stack realignment requires a frame pointer.  If we already started
   // register allocation with frame pointer elimination, it is too late now.