This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SMALL_REGISTER_CLASSES
- To: mrs at wrs dot com (Mike Stump)
- Subject: Re: SMALL_REGISTER_CLASSES
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 09:34:28 -0700
- cc: m dot hayes at elec dot canterbury dot ac dot nz, egcs at cygnus dot com
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <199811251608.IAA28589@kankakee.wrs.com>you write:
> > Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 22:58:32 -0700
> > From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
>
> > > With Bernd's changes to reload, is SMALL_REGISTER_CLASSES required,
> >
> > I suspect it is no longer required.
>
> > In fact, one of my todos is to remove the SMALL_REGISTER_CLASSES
> > define for the mn102 and mn103 ports and see what happens :-)
>
> Since x86 defines it, and since we have a bizzilion people with x86,
> would it make sense for people to try it out on x86 and inspect code
> differences and do performace reviews on the various code they have?!
Interestingly enough I tried to build a mn102 with SMALL_REGISTER_CLASSES
turned off. It died. Sigh...
jeff