RFA: fix bugs in likely_spilled_retval_1 / likely_spilled_retval_p (Was: Re: RFA: Fix rtl-optimization/22258)

Rask Ingemann Lambertsen rask@sygehus.dk
Mon Nov 13 04:00:00 GMT 2006


On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 12:55:51PM +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > I have made this into an actual patch and successfully regression tested
> > it on i686-pc-linux-gnu X sh-elf.
> > I can't do a bootstrap regression test because mainline doesn't
> > bootstrap on my host, see
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-04/msg00055.html
> 
> Please bootstrap/regtest the patch as soon as possible and commit it on the 
> mainline.

   Bootstrapped and tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu with no new failures and no
new passes.

   I noticed a a 16-byte increase in the size of the binaries. Before the
patch:

   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
6501368   17600  567412 7086380  6c212c cc1
7518840   17600  577108 8113548  7bcd8c cc1plus
6608104   17600  569044 7194748  6dc87c cc1obj
6580620   23784  569416 7173820  6d76bc f951

   After the patch:
   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
6501384   17600  567412 7086396  6c213c clean-gcc-i686/gcc/cc1
7518856   17600  577108 8113564  7bcd9c clean-gcc-i686/gcc/cc1plus
6608120   17600  569044 7194764  6dc88c clean-gcc-i686/gcc/cc1obj
6580636   23784  569416 7173836  6d76cc clean-gcc-i686/gcc/f951

   I think this is caused by the extra line of code added by the patch and
function alignment rather than by a missed optimization.

-- 
Rask Ingemann Lambertsen



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list