This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Generic NRV optimization [was Re: two-elementstruct performance (was: strict-aliasing and typedefs) ]
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, Brad Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:30:28 -0500
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Generic NRV optimization [was Re: two-elementstruct performance (was: strict-aliasing and typedefs) ]
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <200402262024.i1QKOCNZ016806@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 15:24, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Yes. But in those cases the return value is going into registers anyway.
> Those cases are a smaller benefit than the one we do handle (return value
> in memory).
Good point. In which case, I guess it doesn't really matter if we
handle targets that return in registers. If the structure has been
scalarized, you'll have a couple of additional reg-reg moves. If not,
we will end up with the same mem-reg move that we had before.