> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Law [mailto:l...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 12:45 PM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, ira] Miss checks in split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap
>
> On 09/01/14 02:
On 09/01/14 02:13, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
To split live-range of register, split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap will
introduce additional register copies. If such copies can not be optimized by
later optimizations, it will lead to code size and performance regression.
My tests on ARM THUMB1 code siz
> -Original Message-
> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
> ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Law
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 4:54 AM
> To: Zhenqiang Chen; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH, ira] Miss checks in split_live_rang
On 08/13/14 20:55, Zhenqiang Chen wrote:
Hi,
Function split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap has code
if (!flag_shrink_wrap)
return false;
But flag_shrink_wrap is TRUE by default when optimize > 0 even if the
port does not support shrink-wrap. To make sure shrink-wrap is
enabled, "HAVE_simp
Hi,
Function split_live_ranges_for_shrink_wrap has code
if (!flag_shrink_wrap)
return false;
But flag_shrink_wrap is TRUE by default when optimize > 0 even if the
port does not support shrink-wrap. To make sure shrink-wrap is
enabled, "HAVE_simple_return" must be defined and "HAVE_simple_r
