Re: IRA copy heuristics

["H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Richard Sandiford
<rdsandiford@googlemail.com> wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If using DF seems like the Right Thing, we could simply apply both
>>>> patches, which would give a similar same allocno order to the one
>>>> we have now.  But it seemed better to look a bit deeper first...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Richard, please apply the both patches.  As I wrote above there is no
>>> SPECFP regression anymore with the patches.  They also solves some
>>> testsuite regressions concerning EH.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Could you please apply your use DF patch? It fixes EH regressions
>> as well as 434.zeusmp in SPEC CPU 2006?
>
> As I said yesterday, I'm reluctant to apply the first patch,
> because without further analysis, there's a danger it's just
> papering over a deeper problem.

I understand.  That is why I only asked for your use DF patch.

> It's interesting that it fixes EH regressions for you too though.
> That was what the patch was originally meant to do, but I thought
> I'd only seem the regressions I was fixing on MIPS, not on x86_64.
> Which target did you see them on?
>

Please see

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37243

I saw EH regressions on Linux/ia32 and Linux/ia64.

Thanks.

-- 
H.J.