This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0

From: Denis Chertykov <denisc at overta dot ru>
To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb at suse dot de>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Denis Chertykov <denisc at overta dot ru>, Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de>, Jan Vroonhof <jvlists at ntlworld dot com>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Bjіrn Haase <Bjoern dot M dot Haase at web dot de>, Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>
Date: 06 Jan 2005 23:06:05 +0300
Subject: Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
References: <1238991885@web.de><4788315.1104847240951.SLOX.WebMail.wwwrun@extimap.suse.de><oeg2fo7v.fsf@localhost.localdomain><200501061923.15988.stevenb@suse.de>

Steven Bosscher <stevenb@suse.de> writes:

> On Thursday 06 January 2005 18:43, Denis Chertykov wrote:
> > I believe that reload can be removed at all for all targets.
> 
> What about fixed register elimination?

What is 'fixed register elimination' ?
(I ask because I discuss new-ra only with Michael Matz and we have
used many definitions of many processes)

Denis.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Steven Bosscher

References:
- What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Bj=F6rn=20Haase
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Denis Chertykov
- Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
  - From: Steven Bosscher

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