This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [df-scan.c] Optimise DF_REFs ordering in collection_rec, use HARD_REG_SETs instead of bitmaps

From: Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis at gmx dot net>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 09:59:38 +0300 (EEST)
Subject: Re: [df-scan.c] Optimise DF_REFs ordering in collection_rec, use HARD_REG_SETs instead of bitmaps
References: <alpine.LNX.2.02.1107080549070.1237@localhost.localdomain> <CABu31nPhsfZtMa306WxMg+VmsAjsZKGp2e9237y6OJ6NxzTVzA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Steven Bosscher wrote:

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 5:20 AM, Dimitrios Apostolou <jimis@gmx.net> wrote:
The attached patch does two things for df_get_call_refs():
How did you test this patch?
Normally, a patch submission comes with text like, "Bootstrapped &
tested on ..., no regressions.". Also, you chould write a ChangeLog
entry, best included in your mail somewhere at the end ;-)

Hi Steven, thanks for the instructions. I've not run the mandatory tests you have told me about, only done some minor testing due to lack of time. I'm not yet posting patches for inclusion, but more as an RFC. Should such patches be sent to gcc instead of gcc-patches?


Thanks,
Dimitris

References:
- [df-scan.c] Optimise DF_REFs ordering in collection_rec, use HARD_REG_SETs instead of bitmaps
  - From: Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: [df-scan.c] Optimise DF_REFs ordering in collection_rec, use HARD_REG_SETs instead of bitmaps
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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