This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [ARM] Implementing doloop pattern
- From: Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot gcc at googlemail dot com>
- To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>
- Cc: Revital1 Eres <ERES at il dot ibm dot com>, Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>, Ayal Zaks <ZAKS at il dot ibm dot com>, cltang at codesourcery dot com, dm at ispras dot ru, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, yao at codesourcery dot com, Roman Zhuykov <zhroma at ispras dot ru>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:11:09 +0000
- Subject: Re: [ARM] Implementing doloop pattern
- References: <4D1C915C.10001@ispras.ru> <OFFD96764C.38FEC784-ONC2257809.005BD5C2-C2257809.005D0F95@il.ibm.com> <1294241704.7406.12.camel@e102346-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <OF65A7FEB3.C64B4914-ONC2257810.002BC31D-C2257810.002BDDE4@il.ibm.com> <m2lj2ygzx1.fsf@whitebox.home>
>> Index: config/arm/thumb2.md
>> ===================================================================
>> --- config/arm/thumb2.md ? ? ?(revision 168424)
>> +++ config/arm/thumb2.md ? ? ?(working copy)
>
>> + ? ? ???? The possible introduction of a new block to initialize the
>> + ? ? ?new IV can potentially effects branch optimizations. ?*/
>
> s/effects/effect/
Err I think it should be "affect" rather than effect here.
Thus s/effects/affect
Ramana