This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch i386]: Expand sibling-tail-calls via accumulator register
- From: Kai Tietz <ktietz at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 04:08:08 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [patch i386]: Expand sibling-tail-calls via accumulator register
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <356718653 dot 5712706 dot 1400794422397 dot JavaMail dot zimbra at redhat dot com> <643791243 dot 10265346 dot 1401266636155 dot JavaMail dot zimbra at redhat dot com> <53861B5B dot 2060705 at redhat dot com> <53863559 dot 6080505 at redhat dot com> <1592496514 dot 10979437 dot 1401312511625 dot JavaMail dot zimbra at redhat dot com> <20140528215200 dot GK10386 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <53865B32 dot 6070307 at redhat dot com> <5386B033 dot 6000908 at redhat dot com>
So, completed bootstrap and regression-test for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (multilib) by using following predicate for sibcall-patch.
(define_predicate "sibcall_memory_operand"
(match_operand 0 "memory_operand")
{
return CONSTANT_P (op);
})
Worked fine, no regressions. Is sibcall-patch ok with that predicate to be applied?
Regards,
Kai