This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC trunk SPEC2000 performance
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 17:58:24 -0600
- Subject: Re: GCC trunk SPEC2000 performance
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <3D125DB3.F3B600B5@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>, Toon Moene writes:
> Richard Henderson wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 12:02:00AM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> > > So, OK - that's it. Addressof makes a MEM out of this register, so we
> > > should accept it down the road.
>
> > Alternately, we may want to remove it from the reg_rtx array.
>
> Well, that would make this code a lot clearer for unsuspecting onlookers
> like me :-)
Or even for suspecting folks ;-)
I think all we'd need to do is clear the entry in the 4 places where we modify
REGs in-place and turn them into MEMs. 3 are in function.c plus one in reload.
There's the possibility we have code which walks the entries in the reg array
and isn't prepared for an entry that has been wiped away. So we should go
through the usual testing procedures for such a change.
jeff