Re: (i386-linux x sh-elf) More weak stack addressing

[Joern Rennecke <amylaar at cygnus dot co dot uk>]

> On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 03:06:35PM -0700, Toshiyasu Morita wrote:
>  
> > Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems peeking beyond labels is 
> > extremely important for the Hitachi SH. Forgive me for overexplaining
> > a bit - I'm basically explaining my assumptions to see if people
> > can spot any glaring oversights.
> > 
> > Consider:
> > 
> > The SH uses pc-relative addressing to load large constants, 
> > therefore it generates literal pools in the .text segment. These 
> > literal pools must be "jumped around" to continue execution.

But they don't exist yet at reload time.  They are generated in a later
pass.

> > >From a code analysis perspective, these jumps aren't really jumps
> > since they jump to a label accessed by only a single jump. Therefore
> > the jump destination can be considered in the same block as the jump
> > source.
> > 
> > If an optimization pass assumes a jump ends a basic block, it will miss 
> > many potential optimiations.

My test doesn't consider jumps - only labels.