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: pr52543

From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
To: Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck at naturalbridge dot com>
Cc: gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Sandiford <r dot sandiford at uk dot ibm dot com>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>, Kenneth Zadeck <Kenneth dot Zadeck at NaturalBridge dot com>, avr at gjlay dot de
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 06:55:44 -0700
Subject: Re: pr52543
References: <4F67D595.9030700@naturalbridge.com> <mcrd387n9bf.fsf@dhcp-172-18-216-180.mtv.corp.google.com> <4F6881EA.9080306@naturalbridge.com> <mcrvclzl7b7.fsf@dhcp-172-18-216-180.mtv.corp.google.com> <4F6889CC.8080302@naturalbridge.com>

Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> writes:

> i actually care about all registers, not just the hard ones.    as it
> turns out i had been wrong and lower-subregs splits pseudo to pseudo
> moves, and hard reg to and from psuedo moves.
>
> register_move_cost requires the regclasses.
>
> anyway that is not the right thing to do for the shifts.

I suppose you could compare costs.

Two new target hooks is not impossible, but the information ought to be
available in other ways.

Ian

References:
- pr52543
  - From: Kenneth Zadeck
- Re: pr52543
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: pr52543
  - From: Kenneth Zadeck
- Re: pr52543
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: pr52543
  - From: Kenneth Zadeck

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