On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> int copy_start, copy_num;
>> int j;
>>
>> - if (INSN_P (return_copy))
>> + if (INSN_P (return_copy)
>> + && !DEBUG_INSN_P (return_copy))
>
> Please use if (NONDEBUG_INSN_P
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 06:07:20PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> @@ -242,7 +242,8 @@ create_pre_exit (int n_entities, int *entity_map,
> int copy_start, copy_num;
> int j;
>
> - if (INSN_P (return_copy))
> + if (INSN_P (return_copy)
> +
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> It looks to me, that we in fact want:
>>
>> --cut here--
>> Index: mode-switching.c
>> ===
>> --- mode-switching.c(revision 193407)
>> +++ mode-switching.c(working copy)
> It looks to me, that we in fact want:
>
> --cut here--
> Index: mode-switching.c
> ===
> --- mode-switching.c(revision 193407)
> +++ mode-switching.c(working copy)
> @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@
> short_bloc
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
>> 2012-11-05 Uros Bizjak
>> Kaz Kojima
>>
>> PR target/41993
>> * mode-switching.c (create_pre_exit): Set return_copy to
>> last_insn when copy_start is a pseudo reg.
It looks to me, that we in fact want:
--cu
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 11:58 PM, Kaz Kojima wrote:
> The attached patch is to solve PR target/41993 which will affect
> targets using MODE_EXIT.
> Without it, we can't find all return registers for __builtin_return
> in mode-switching.c:create_pre_exit. See the trail #4 by Uros in
> the PR for t
Eric Botcazou wrote:
> I was referring to the ret_start/reg_end/nregs business: why is it necessary?
I thought that they are for the return value which requires
multiple hard registers.
Regards,
kaz
> Although I might be getting you wrong, the current code does a scan
> based on those lines but builtin_return, functions with no return
> value and exceptions require special treatments and made things
> complex.
I was referring to the ret_start/reg_end/nregs business: why is it necessary?
--
Eric Botcazou wrote:
> OK, thanks. The number of special cases dealt with in the function is on the
> verge of making it barely understandable though. Why couldn't a backward
> scan
> based only on:
>
> /* If the return register is not likely spilled, - as is
>
> 2012-11-05 Uros Bizjak
> Kaz Kojima
>
> PR target/41993
> * mode-switching.c (create_pre_exit): Set return_copy to
> last_insn when copy_start is a pseudo reg.
OK, thanks. The number of special cases dealt with in the function is on the
verge of making it bare
10 matches
Mail list logo
