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: Is the loop pass allowed to introduce new call insns?

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: John David Anglin <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>
Cc: law at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 16:57:20 -0800
Subject: Re: Is the loop pass allowed to introduce new call insns?
References: <200303040001.h2401SFK016989@speedy.slc.redhat.com> <200303040017.h240Hl8f017992@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>

On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 07:17:47PM -0500, John David Anglin wrote:
> xmpyu was not used because the option -mdisable-fpregs was used,
> disabling the pattern.  The test code is from a parisc-linux
> kernel build.  Whether it is this is the best choice on a PA 2
> machine, I'm not sure.

Would it be feasable to simply make all of the fpregs call-saved?
Alternately, leave a few of them unfixed, as we do with ia64.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is the loop pass allowed to introduce new call insns?
  - From: John David Anglin

References:
- Re: Is the loop pass allowed to introduce new call insns?
  - From: law
- Re: Is the loop pass allowed to introduce new call insns?
  - From: John David Anglin

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