This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
(RFC) (was Re: [PATCH] Improve SH literal pool generation.)
- From: "Naveen Sharma, Noida" <naveens at noida dot hcltech dot com>
- To: Joern Rennecke <joern dot rennecke at superh dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Rakesh Kumar - Software, Noida" <rakeshku at noida dot hcltech dot com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:24:29 +0530
- Subject: (RFC) (was Re: [PATCH] Improve SH literal pool generation.)
> > This had been suggested Joern Rennecke.
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-04/msg01453.html
> > and some of his earlier messages.
> > Also see these comments in sh.c (add_constant)
> > 2659 /* ??? This stuff should be done at the same time that
> we shorten
> > branches.
> > 2660 As it is now, we must assume that all branches are
> the maximum size,
> > and
> > 2661 this causes us to almost always output constant
> pools sooner than
> > 2662 necessary. */
> > The strategy is more or less as suggested in the link.
> I was really thinking of doing a full-blown branch shortening at the
> same time as constant pool allocation and branch splitting, also
> putting the constants from branch spiltting into constant pools.
> And all of that in machine-independent code.
Before I put in effort to make this machine-independent, I would like
to get the opinion of other port maintainers. This might be useful
for other ports. A grep for 'literal pools', 'literal table' show up
s390, arm as candidate.
PS: Useful messages on understanding thr issues are: