-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James E Wilson wrote:
> Sebastian Biallas wrote:
>
>> You don't need to reserve a stack slot for the return address on x86.
>> The stack slot will be allocated implicitly by the "call" instruction.
>
> OK, then this must be a similar issue to the reg
Sebastian Biallas wrote:
You don't need to reserve a stack slot for the return address on x86.
The stack slot will be allocated implicitly by the "call" instruction.
OK, then this must be a similar issue to the register saves in the
prologue. There is confusion between calculating the frame size,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James E Wilson wrote:
> Sebastian Biallas wrote:
>
>> But I noticed some smaller optimization issues on x86, and on of them is
>> a regression to gcc 3.3 so I'm reporting this here. Accept my apologies
>> if this is already known, but I think it's wor
Sebastian Biallas wrote:
But I noticed some smaller optimization issues on x86, and on of them is
a regression to gcc 3.3 so I'm reporting this here. Accept my apologies
if this is already known, but I think it's worth noting.
You can submit optimization regressions into our bugzilla bug database.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello!
I just tested the prerelease of gcc 4.0 (to see whether my programs
still compile and work), and I must say: Congratulations, no real
problems so far.
But I noticed some smaller optimization issues on x86, and on of them is
a regression to gcc
