Roland McGrath <mcgra...@google.com> writes: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On Jun 14, 2012, at 10:16 AM, Roland McGrath wrote: >>> But if e.g. I use -ffixed-r9 then I think it's a reasonable expectation >>> that no code is generated that touches r9 in any way, shape, or form. >> >> Also, I can't help but wonder if global_regs is respected. > > It's clearly not. Making the added condition !fixed_regs[i] && > !global_regs[i] seems sensible to me.
All global registers have to be fixed though. The original seemed fine to me FWIW. Richard
