This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: peephole vs RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- Cc: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 08:12:29 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: peephole vs RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P
- References: <17318.64145.41810.488474@zapata.pink> <m38xuglvrk.fsf@gossamer.airs.com> <17319.3754.844531.876599@zapata.pink> <m34q54lot9.fsf@gossamer.airs.com> <20051220073124.GA3576@redhat.com> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0601022227260.18683@dair.pair.com>
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 10:35:40PM -0500, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> I was just bitten by the same behavior for define_split.
> Should the same go for define_splits ...
Um, sure.
> and maybe also as a guard test for combine?
That would be silly, since the note doesn't exist that early.
r~