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: Put optimization/7871 patches on gcc 3.3 and 3.4 branches

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at wasabisystems dot com>
Cc: gdr at integrable-solutions dot net, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 19:27:55 -0800
Subject: Re: Put optimization/7871 patches on gcc 3.3 and 3.4 branches
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <m3oerjriug.fsf@gossamer.airs.com>

Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

I propose putting the patch for optimization/7871 onto the 3.3 and 3.4
branches.  I've confirmed that the x86 and m68k test cases in that PR
are currently broken on both branches, and that this patch fixes those
test cases on both branches.  I believe that this patch is reasonably
safe, as it only affects global register variables.

What is the difference in semantics between SET and CLOBBER in this context? Why does your patch help?

I'm also not sure using SET is safe. On an architecture like IA64 (with NAT bits), does using a SET cause the compiler to think that the register has a well-defined value as opposed to a NAT value?

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Put optimization/7871 patches on gcc 3.3 and 3.4 branches
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

References:
- Put optimization/7871 patches on gcc 3.3 and 3.4 branches
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

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