http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54602
--- Comment #5 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-10-10 23:24:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > > I don't know the history about it. I can only imagine that some > system could assume some banked regs will be not clobbered with > their exception handler and will be used like as normal registers. > A new -m option which controls the behavior of which default > is not to save/restore the banked regs? Oh well, why not ;) But first I'd like to think this through. I'll open a new PR for it later.
