Re: Ping shrink wrap patches

2011-10-13 Thread Alan Modra
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 07:04:59PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 10/13/11 18:50, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > On 10/13/11 14:27, Alan Modra wrote: > >> Without the ifcvt > >> optimization for a function "int foo (int x)" we might have something > >> like > >> > >> r29 = r3; // save r3 in callee sav

Re: Ping shrink wrap patches

2011-10-13 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 10/13/11 18:50, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > On 10/13/11 14:27, Alan Modra wrote: >> Without the ifcvt >> optimization for a function "int foo (int x)" we might have something >> like >> >> r29 = r3; // save r3 in callee saved reg >> if (some test) goto exit_label >> // main body of foo, calling ot

Re: Ping shrink wrap patches

2011-10-13 Thread Bernd Schmidt
On 10/13/11 14:27, Alan Modra wrote: > Without the ifcvt > optimization for a function "int foo (int x)" we might have something > like > > r29 = r3; // save r3 in callee saved reg > if (some test) goto exit_label > // main body of foo, calling other functions > r3 = 0; > return; > exit_label

Re: Ping shrink wrap patches

2011-10-13 Thread Richard Henderson
On 10/13/2011 05:27 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > Ping > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg01002.html > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg01003.html Ok. > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-09/msg01596.html > > The last one needs a tweak. > s/FUNCTION_VALUE_REGNO_P/targetm.ca