This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] gcc/config/h8300/h8300.md
- To: Kazu Hirata <kazu at hxi dot com>
- Subject: Re: [patch] gcc/config/h8300/h8300.md
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 14:54:26 -0600
- cc: "'gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Reply-To: law at cygnus dot com
In message <41ECF07CC183D111A6F800805FEDAB190CE636@EXCHANGE1>you write:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> > Hmmm, I didn't think caller-save used push/pop insns to save/restore
> > registers around calls. I thought it used simple stores.
> >
> > I'd be very surprised if this change was useful for caller-saves. Can
> > you show me precisely how we're getting "push" instructions instead of
> > "mov" instructions.
>
> /* h8300-hms-gcc -ms -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer */
> typedef long elm;
[ ... ]
Thanks.
As expected this has _nothing_ to do with caller-save. The instructions
you point out are argument pushes.
I would recommend you look into the load_multiple and store_multiple patterns
and see if they can be used to do what you want.
jeff