问题描述
我发现,如果一个被调用的函数不返回(即标记为 _Noreturn
/ [[noreturn]]
),则所有主要的编译器都不会进行尾部调用优化.或通话后有 __ builtin_unreachable()
).这是预期的行为,而不是错过的优化吗?如果是,为什么?
I have come to fact that all major compilers will not do tail call optimization if a called function does not return (i.e. marked as _Noreturn
/[[noreturn]]
or there is a __builtin_unreachable()
after the call). Is this an intended behavior and not a missed optimization, and if so why?
示例1:
#ifndef __cplusplus
#define NORETURN _Noreturn
#else
#define NORETURN [[noreturn]]
#endif
void canret(void);
NORETURN void noret(void);
void foo(void) { canret(); }
void bar(void) { noret(); }
C: https://godbolt.org/z/pJfEe- C ++: https://godbolt.org/z/-4c78K
示例2:
#ifdef _MSC_VER
#define UNREACHABLE __assume(0)
#else
#define UNREACHABLE __builtin_unreachable()
#endif
void f(void);
void foo(void) { f(); }
void bar(void) { f(); UNREACHABLE; }
推荐答案
这是有意的,尽管可能会引起争议,因为它会严重损害堆栈的使用属性.出于这个原因,我什至使欺骗编译器以为无法返回的函数可以.原因是许多noreturn函数类似于 abort
(甚至调用 abort
),并且运行调试器的某人可能希望能够看到调用发生的位置来自-会因尾部呼叫而丢失的信息.
It's intentional, though perhaps controversial since it can seriously harm stack usage properties; for this reason I've even resorted to tricking the compiler to think a function that can't return can. The reasoning is that many noreturn functions are abort
-like (or even call abort
), and that it's likely someone running a debugger wants to be able to see where the call happened from -- information which would be lost by a tail call.
引用:
- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id = 10837
- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id = 56165
- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id = 67327
- 等
这篇关于为什么noreturn/__ builtin_unreachable阻止尾部调用优化的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持!