[PATCH][IRA] Analysis of register usage of functions for usage by IRA.

Tom de Vries Tom_deVries@mentor.com
Wed Sep 3 22:24:00 GMT 2014


On 03-09-14 20:12, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Just for my curiosity, why is the second condition (after &&)
> needed in this clause in the first place?
>
>> >  	      if (ira_hard_reg_set_intersection_p (regno, mode,
>> >+						   *crossed_calls_clobber_regs)
>> >+		  && (ira_hard_reg_set_intersection_p (regno, mode,
>> >  						       call_used_reg_set)
>> >-		      || HARD_REGNO_CALL_PART_CLOBBERED (regno, mode))
> If a register is in crossed_calls_clobber_regs, can it ever*not*
> be a call-clobbered register?

I *think* you're right that the second condition is not needed. But I'll leave 
that for a follow-up patch.

Thanks,
- Tom



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list