This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: ARM THUMB: fundamental bug in handling of far jumps?

Excerpt of message (sent 29 January 2002) by Richard Henderson:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:24:25AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> > that's clear, as far as it is about jumping around a conditional jump. I
> > do not understand why the above would be preferred over
> > 
> > 	b[!cond] .LABEL
> > 	add r2, r3
> > .LABEL:
> > 
> > with the latter having at least one (two, if it's a far
> > jump-with-jump-around-the-conditional)
> 
> Not-taken branches are normally better for performance.  Might not
> apply to the thumb though.

Would this make a good target-dependent item?  I know of one target
where branches taken are definitely better than not-taken: the 68040.

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