This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: question regarding regrename and failure of 950704-1.c on main
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: John David Anglin <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 14:46:18 -0600
- Subject: Re: question regarding regrename and failure of 950704-1.c on main
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <20020510132633.C16397@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson writes:
> On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 01:22:28PM -0600, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > I really think we're better off fixing regrename to be a little more caref
> > about it's actions in respect to HARD_REGNO_MODE_OK.
> I'll continue to maintain that what you're currently generating is
> in fact illegal rtl. But there is the patch I posted; you can see
> if that works.
I don't totally disagree. But it seems to me that there may be cases where
ABI's are going to mandate something like this and we won't be able to
work around it as easily as we can do in the PA port. The only reason we
can work around it on the PA port is because the argument registers and the
return registers happen to be disjoint.