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: [PATCH 1/2, combine] Try REG_EQUAL for nonzero_bits


> From: Jeff Law [mailto:law@redhat.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 2:49 PM
> >
> > Wouldn't that only tell whether the macro can stay undefined for
> rs6000?
> > MD files for rs6000 could have been tighten since then but not others
> > backend's MD files.
> It's certainly possible, but unlikely.
> 
> I would virtually guarantee that lm32, rx, & mep, rx, tilegx, tilegxpro
>   were never updated.

Perfect, I was hoping that one of these others might not have changed
much.

> 
> So another approach would be to build some cross tools and verify that
> they generate the same code before/after ripping that code out.

Of course both approaches are not exclusive. I'll try to test with *both*
rs6000 bootstrap and with a cross-compiler for one of these targets.

> You have to request access.  IIRC, there's a big ppc64 machine in there.

Will do.

Best regards,

Thomas




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