This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: New gcc port (ATMEL AVR) and question


Hello !

> Denis Chertykov writes:
>  > But in some cases (in difficult tests - `fp-bit.c') compiler produce
>  > the pattern (inside the movM insn) like:
>  > (mem:ANY-MODE (plus:HI (reg:HI 26 r26)
>  >                        (const_int some-number-lower-then-63))
>  > I'm confused. May be something wrong ?
>  > IMHO: reload do this, but why ?
> 
> Have you always noticed this behaviour?
This depends from optimization level (-O3 produce wrong pattern more
frequently than -Os).
REG_ALLOC_ORDER and ORDER_REGS_FOR_LOCAL_ALLOC also influence to this.

> Which version of egcs are you patching against?

I'm patching egcs-1.1.1

Denis.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]