This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: USE patch vs the PA
- To: law at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: USE patch vs the PA
- From: Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
- Date: Sat, 25 Oct 97 16:03:05 +0200
- Cc: egcs at cygnus dot com
- Organization: Moene Computational Physics, Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
- References: <16747.877741209@hurl.cygnus.com>
> There were basically three problems with the alias code.
> I'll write them up in more detail later this weekend.
>
> * Didn't handle autoincrement addressing. It just
> punted. autoincrement addresses can be treated just
> like a set of the base value to itself plus a small
> constant.
Heh, heh, that means that I was right: The PA is `interesting' in
this regard; it's one of the few mainstream architectures with
autoincrement addressing for which gcc defines function units for
instruction scheduling. So it's no wonder no-one else noticed this
;-)
The arm and the pdp11 are two others (yeah, right, SPEC95 on a PDP 11 :-)
Great job !
Cheers,
Toon.