Stabilization status

David Edelsohn dje@watson.ibm.com
Sun Jan 31 23:58:00 GMT 1999


>>>>> Jeffrey A Law writes:

Jeff> At the least, local constants should probably go into a per-file pool with a
Jeff> reference to that pool placed in the TOC.

Jeff> Depending on how statics are output and how you build TOC entries, it may be
Jeff> possible to do something similar for them -- without all the combine-statics
Jeff> tree copying hair.

	Utilizing both suggestions is exactly how IBM's XLC compiler
efficiently interacts with the TOC.  This would remove most of the TOC
overflow issues.  If GCC provided multiple constant pools (local
constants, addresses local to module [statics], global addresses) and the
PowerPC port could direct different types of constants into different
pools, we would solve this problem.  I peeked at the current constant pool
support looking at how to add more, but have never really had time to
pursue is myself.

David



More information about the Gcc mailing list