On Sat, 2020-02-29 at 09:38 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > It really would have just been a workaround for some of the R0 issues anyway. > I think at its core R0 on the SH probably needs to be treated more like a > temporary rather than a general register. But that's probably a huge change, > both in terms of just getting it working right and in terms of addressing the > code quality regressions that would introduce. >
I think one of the major issues is that R0 is a constraint in several addressing modes for memory accesses. I believe I once had the idea of hiding R0 from RA ... then insert reg-reg copies (to load R0) after RA/reload ... and then somehow do back propagation to get rid of the reg-reg copies again. Another idea was to run a pre-RA pass to pre- allocate all R0 things. But I think it's all just running in sqrt(1) circles after all. Cheers, Oleg
