> Ok, thanks for your reply. The 4.6 backend was testing if the hardware
> FP was live, and did some optimization whatever -fomit-frame-pointer or
> -fno-omit-frame-pointer. So it was not a valid optimization?
It was sort of a bug since -fno-omit-frame-pointer is in effect unless you
specify othe
>> I'm porting a private backend from an old 4.6 branch to the 6.1.0
>> release, and I have some troubles eliminating my frame pointer without
>> -fomit-frame-pointer option.
>> Elimination is correctly done with -fomit-frame-pointer.
> If the target's default is -fno-omit-frame-pointer, then it's
> I'm porting a private backend from an old 4.6 branch to the 6.1.0
> release, and I have some troubles eliminating my frame pointer without
> -fomit-frame-pointer option.
> Elimination is correctly done with -fomit-frame-pointer.
If the target's default is -fno-omit-frame-pointer, then it's as ex
