https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70961
Stefan "Bebbo" Franke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stefan at franke dot ms
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70961
--- Comment #5 from Wilco ---
As for a simple example, Proc_4 in Dhrystone is a good one. With -O2 and
-fno-rename-registers I get the following on Thumb-2:
00c8 :
c8: b430push{r4, r5}
ca: f240 0300 movwr3,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70961
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> In which case it should not rename that chain rather than just ignore the
> preference (and a preference of NO_REGS should probably also block renaming).
That's not what the hook was initially designed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70961
--- Comment #3 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
> Pass #2 ignores it since the preference simply couldn't be honored.
In which case it should not rename that chain rather than just ignore the
preference (and a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70961
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou ---
> The super_class has nothing to do with the class that is searched for
> renaming registers though, it's just the info passed to the back-end to
> compute this class. For example, on the ARM, the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70961
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
