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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: rs6000 sibcall test

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot OZ dot AU>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2002 19:53:36 -0700
Subject: Re: rs6000 sibcall test
References: <20020906170354.I8357@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20020906130044.GA12317@ceres.cs.mu.oz.au> <20020906233642.K8357@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20020906234704.L8357@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>

On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 11:47:04PM +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> Fired that off too quickly.  My explanation covers why we need to
> use binds_local_p, not why TREE_ASM_WRITTEN is necessary.  So
> back to that question again..

The only explanation must be that the assumption of
branch in range.  If the linker takes care of that,
you're fine.  It doesn't on Alpha.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: rs6000 sibcall test
  - From: Alan Modra

References:
- rs6000 sibcall test
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: rs6000 sibcall test
  - From: Fergus Henderson
- Re: rs6000 sibcall test
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: rs6000 sibcall test
  - From: Alan Modra

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