This is the mail archive of the 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: [4.9 PATCH, alpha]: Switch alpha to LRA

On 04/22/2013 11:17 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Richard Henderson <> wrote:
On 01/28/2013 03:14 PM, Uros Bizjak wrote:

2013-01-28  Uros Bizjak<>

         * config/alpha/alpha.c (TARGET_LRA_P): New define.

Bootstrapped and regression tested [1] on alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu.

OK for 4.9?


Unfortunately, alphas are much more tied to reload than it was hoped.
While latest alphas (with FIX and BWX ISAs) survived transition to LRA
without problems, further testing on ev4 and ev5 triggered various
problems, one of them is PR57032 [1] that exposed rather unique way of
handling aligned/nonaligned memory operands.

The patch was reverted.

I suspect that fixing older alphas to live with LRA would be quite
involved task, and I guess nobody (including me) wants to spend
considerable amount of time on a dying architecture. Consequently,
this also means that alphas will die together with reload as far as
gcc is concerned.

Would it make sense to deprecate the older Alpha implementations without killing the "modern" ones?


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