This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PR 6394
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>
- Cc: dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca, dje at watson dot ibm dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 19:49:37 -0600
- Subject: Re: PR 6394
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <200204302327.g3UNR2X26790@desire.geoffk.org>, Geoff Keating
writes:
> > What I find curious is that we have the same cost (0) for
> > R1_REGS, GENERAL_REGS and FP_REGS for reg714, yet GENERAL_OR_FP_REGS has
> > a cost of 7000+?!? Weird.
>
> Possibly because GENERAL_OR_FP_REGS doesn't match FP_REG_CLASS_P?
Looks unrelated. It's also the case that regclass.c knows how to deal with
superclasses in a pretty reasonable manner. It looks like the costing is
messed up because the PA's 'T' constraint was accepting something it should
have rejected.
jeff