------- Comment #18 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-09-07 19:18 ------- (In reply to comment #17) > I am thinking in the same direction. merge_assign_reloads is dated by 1993. > Since then it was not practically changed. I guess postreload can remove > unecessary loads if it is generated without merge_assigned_reload. > > I've tried to compile SPEC2000 by gcc-4.4 with and without > merge_assigned_reloads. I did not find any code difference. I've tried a lot > of other programs with the same result. The single difference in code I found > exists on this test case.
Thanks, that's certainly good to know! > So I'd remove merge_assigned_reloads at all as it became obsolete long ago. I agree, this seems the best way forward. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45312 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100907191814.13767.qm...@sourceware.org
