https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #12 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #10) > (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #9) > > At the current (lack of) pace I don't know when all of that will be done. > > So my idea was to at least reduce the R0 problem for users by making LRA the > > default in GCC 6. If we have to add the 2nd postreload temporarily, so be > > it. When the other solutions become more mature and stable, we can remove > > the 2nd postreload thing again. > > I don't object. Please go ahead. OK. I would like to wait with that a bit though. I'm still trying to get some work done on AMS... (In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #11) > > I've confirmed that there are no new failures with the new patch on > sh4-unknown-linux-gnu. > BTW, the ICE for gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-4.c -Os pops up again > even with the unmodified tree. So we have no regressions at all. Great, thanks! I'll commit it to trunk and GCC 5 branch.
