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: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0

From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
To: Paul Brook <paul at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Björn Haase <Bjoern dot M dot Haase at web dot de>
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:35:22 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
References: <1238991885@web.de> <200501021628.00741.paul@codesourcery.com>

On Sun, 2 Jan 2005, Paul Brook wrote:

On Sunday 02 January 2005 13:57, Björn Haase wrote:

concerning 'it's not like anyone will miss it' :

For the avr target, new-ra used to be *extremely* useful. There have been
discussions about the -fnew-ra issue. Unfortunately not on this list but on
some of the specialized lists for the avr targets, iirc. Maybe we should
cross post summaries of our discussions also at this list.?


I don't think anyone is disagreeing that gcc needs a new register allocator
The suggestion is that the "new-ra" on mainline is sufficiently broken that
it's better to rip it out and either start again or fix it on a branch than
leave it to bitrot and get in the way on mainline.


Bingo.
Heck, i helped write it and i agree.
new-ra has failed, long live a new new-ra

Follow-Ups:
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Jan Vroonhof
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Denis Chertykov

References:
- What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Bj=F6rn=20Haase
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Paul Brook

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