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: Unaligned double


> resolved. But, I'm not sure if that breaks anything else because
> I'm not sure why it was NO_REGS for pa32 and FP_REGS for pa64.

Changing CLASS_CANNOT_CHANGE_MODE from NO_REGS to a non-empty register class
should never cause the compiler to generate wrong code, unless something
else is broken.  However, if needlessly defined, it can cause worse
code generation (i.e. larger & slower code) due to the restricted choices
of the register allocator.  For targets with very tight register resources
(which the pa is not), it could also lead to reload aborts if it pushes
the maximum amount of registers of any class required for reload beyond
what is available.

So the main concern here would be the efficiency of the emitted code.

-- 
Joern Rennecke                  |            gcc expert for hire
amylaar@onetel.net.uk           |  send enquiries to: jwr_jobs@onetel.net.uk


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