This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes try III

From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 16:43:58 -0500
Subject: Re: [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes try III
References: <20021015175807.GY30297@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20021015204457.GA25225@redhat.com> <20021027193205.GD22323@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20021027205940.GB24327@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <20021027211624.GC24327@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>

On Sun, Oct 27, 2002 at 10:16:24PM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Hi,
> this version should work in the corner cases too.
> Bootstrapped/regtested x86-64, i386 bootstrap just started.  OK if it
> passes? (for BIB)

Is indirect sibcall with 6+ regs common enough to justify adding two
more register classes on IA-32?
Last time I checked already the current huge number of IA-32 reg classes
is a compile performance problem which would go even worse by this patch.

	Jakub

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes try III
  - From: Jan Hubicka

References:
- [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- [3.4-BIB] x86-64 sibcall fixes try III
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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