On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:20 AM, Greta Yorsh wrote:
> I'm attaching a new version of the patch. Fixed all comments and retested.
> No regression on qemu --with-cpu cortex-a9.
I assume that on the Cortex-A9 this generates a LDM instead of an
expensive LDRD. For reference, a tight load loop takes 2
On 29 February 2012 14:20, Greta Yorsh wrote:
> I'm attaching a new version of the patch. Fixed all comments and retested.
> No regression on qemu --with-cpu cortex-a9.
OK by me but please give 24 hours for an RM to comment / object.
cheers
Ramana
am...@gcc.gnu.org; p...@codesourcery.com;
> ni...@redhat.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH,ARM] Improve peepholes for LDM with commutative
> operators
>
> [Sorry about the duplicate mail. My mailer seems to have eaten up the
> original reply I sent. ]
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 05:09:
[Sorry about the duplicate mail. My mailer seems to have eaten up the
original reply I sent. ]
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 05:09:05PM -, Greta Yorsh wrote:
> Is it OK for GCC 4.7 Stage 4 ?
This is stage4 - I'd like to hear what the RM's think. Technically
it's fixing a regression and is low risk
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 05:09:05PM -, Greta Yorsh wrote:
> Is it OK for GCC 4.7 Stage 4 ?
Technically this is a regression in 4.7 compared to 4.6,
so I'd like to get this in.
However given the stage we are and given that it's not a
correctness issue, I would defer to the RMs.
In any case
