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.

llvm-svn: 187618

4 files changed, 7 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp b/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp
index 80cfb5e0234..0703df09a60 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/CodeGen/MachineFunction.cpp
+++ b/llvm/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/llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp
index 9274baf1198..58c06e392cf 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/ARM/ARMBaseRegisterInfo.cpp
+++ b/llvm/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/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp
index b762a57b9c9..adba613d6e9 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp
+++ b/llvm/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/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp b/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp
index c6655f7c444..0923310cf31 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86RegisterInfo.cpp
+++ b/llvm/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.