GCC trunk SPEC2000 performance

[law@redhat.com]

In message <u87kkr8hm6.fsf@gromit.moeb>, Andreas Jaeger writes:
 > law@redhat.com writes:
 > 
 > > 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 onlooker
 > s
 > >  > 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 mo
 > dify
 > > REGs in-place and turn them into MEMs.  3 are in function.c plus one in re
 > load.
 > >
 > > There's the possibility we have code which walks the entries in the reg ar
 > ray
 > > 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.
 > 
 > Who's going to do this?  Honza is going on holiday and I fear he won't
 > have time to fix it before.
 > 
 > Shall I file a GNATS entry for this referring to the discussion?
I've been poking at it.  Let's just say there's certainl code which doesn't
deal well with clearing those entries.  Depending on how many more problems
we find, we may fall back to Jan's patch + comment updates.

jeff