http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #48 from Richard Earnshaw 2011-09-12
15:31:51 UTC ---
On 12/09/11 16:18, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> A much simpler way to fix this is to emit a barrier just prior to
> mucking around with stack pointer in the epilogue. That's h
--- Comment #9 from rearnsha at arm dot com 2010-02-08 16:31 ---
Subject: Re: [arm] Combine cannot do its job because
immediate operand is used instead of register
On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 16:30 +, rearnsha at arm dot com wrote:
> mov r1, r5, r4, lsr
--- Comment #8 from rearnsha at arm dot com 2010-02-08 16:30 ---
Subject: Re: [arm] Combine cannot do its job because
immediate operand is used instead of register
On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 16:11 +, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Can someone please explain what
--- Comment #6 from rearnsha at arm dot com 2009-07-13 14:22 ---
Subject: Re: allocate local variables with fewer
instructions
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 10:43 +, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> But how to do this in GCC... The "push {lr}" is never even
--- Comment #6 from rearnsha at arm dot com 2009-06-17 08:40 ---
Subject: Re: use stm and ldm to access consecutive
memory words
> --- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-06-16 18:16 ---
> Registers also need to be consecutive, starting from certain re
--- Comment #6 from rearnsha at arm dot com 2006-09-11 12:14 ---
Subject: Re: compiler generates incorrect ARM instructions
when using long bitfields
On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 13:56, jason dot morgan at vpnsolutions dot uk dot
com wrote:
> Where do I obtain EABI and what eff
