On 27/11/13 18:27, Jeff Law wrote: > On 11/27/13 10:49, Yvan Roux wrote: >>> How can that be correct? >>> >>> The secondary reload macros/hooks define cases where additional registers >>> are needed to reload certain forms of rtl. I doubt the use of LRA >>> completely eliminates the need for secondary reloads. >> >> Vladimir explained me that in that case on arm, secondary reload hook >> confuses LRA, and that returning NO_REGS will let LRA deal with >> constraints, but I may have badly understand what he said. > So I think with the additional information from Vlad, I think we can go > forward with your patch -- conditionally approved for the trunk. The > condition is giving the ARM maintainers 24hrs to object. >
This is OK, given the previous discussion. R.
