On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 8:19 PM Maciej W. Rozycki <ma...@orcam.me.uk> wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2021, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > I think 3/3 is worth backporting to GCC 11 at one point, perhaps 11.2, so > > > that it can be easily picked downstream, as it improves code generation > > > with old reload and we may not have another major release still using it. > > > > > > OTOH switching to LRA regresses code generation seriously, by making the > > > indexed and indirect VAX address modes severely underutilised, so while > > > with these changes in place the backend can be switched to LRA with just a > > > trivial to remove the redefinition of TARGET_LRA_P, I think it is not yet > > > the right time to do it. > > > > > > It is not a hard show-stopper though, so while I plan to look into LRA > > > now to figure out what is missing there that the old reload has to satisfy > > > the VAX backend, the switch to LRA can now be made anytime if so required > > > and I am preempted for whatever reason (and nobody else gets to it). > > > > > > Questions, comments, OK to apply? > > > > Sounds like a reasonable stance to me. The patches look all good, thus > > they are OK to apply. > > With GCC 11.1 out now I have committed these changes. Thank you for your > review. > > FAOD, as noted above will it be OK if I backport 3/3 to GCC 11 now, for > inclusion with 11.2? > > While not a regression fix the change is contained in the VAX backend, > not a mainstream one, and now it is possibly the final opportunity to have > old reload improved for the VAX target as it's quite likely we'll switch > to LRA and dump old reload with GCC 12, and we may not be able to get LRA > on a par with old reload for VAX for a while yet. Conversely, with the > improvement in place downstream users (NetBSD) may be able to pick it > easily enough to make a good use of it now. > > WDYT?
Works for me. Richard. > Maciej
