This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug bootstrap/44470] [4.6 Regression] Failed to bootstrap with - -with-arch=atom
- From: "hjl dot tools at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 17 Aug 2010 00:11:04 -0000
- Subject: [Bug bootstrap/44470] [4.6 Regression] Failed to bootstrap with - -with-arch=atom
- References: <bug-44470-682@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #21 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-08-17 00:11 -------
(In reply to comment #19)
> Created an attachment (id=21497)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21497&action=view) [edit]
> A patch which should produce more add insns
>
> In other words, don't we at least need this patch to avoid generating
> unnecessary leas?
>
> But still, alternative 2 of addsi_1 looks extremely ugly, and I think the code
> before revision 160557 made more sense. What exactly was wrong with it?
>
Do you have a testcase to show how it changes the generated assembly
codes?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44470