Hi,
> > gcc/
> > * config/mips/mips-protos.h (mips_hard_regno_rename_ok): New
> > prototype.
> > * config/mips/mips.c (mips_hard_regno_rename_ok): New
> > function.
> > (mips_hard_regno_scratch_ok): Likewise.
> > (TARGET_HARD_REGNO_SCRATCH_OK): Define macro.
> > * config/mips/m
On Aug 15, 2015, at 9:19 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
> Mike Stump writes:
>> On Aug 15, 2015, at 3:32 AM, Richard Sandiford
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The port is only buggy if they have define_peephole2s with match_scratches
>>> and those match_scratches require a register that would be saved by
>>>
Mike Stump writes:
> On Aug 15, 2015, at 3:32 AM, Richard Sandiford
> wrote:
>>
>> The port is only buggy if they have define_peephole2s with match_scratches
>> and those match_scratches require a register that would be saved by
>> an interrupt function. In other cases defining T_H_R_S_O would
On Aug 15, 2015, at 3:32 AM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> The port is only buggy if they have define_peephole2s with match_scratches
> and those match_scratches require a register that would be saved by
> an interrupt function. In other cases defining T_H_R_S_O would have
> no effect (but still
Robert Suchanek writes:
>> > You also need to do the same thing for TARGET_HARD_REGNO_SCRATCH_OK,
>> > to stop peephole2 from using unsaved registers as scratch registers.
>> >
>> > I should dig out my patches to clean up this interface. It's just
>> > too brittle to have two macros that say what
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Suchanek [mailto:robert.sucha...@imgtec.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:01 AM
> To: Mike Stump; Richard Sandiford
> Cc: Moore, Catherine; Matthew Fortune; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH][MIPS] Fix regist
Hi,
> > You also need to do the same thing for TARGET_HARD_REGNO_SCRATCH_OK,
> > to stop peephole2 from using unsaved registers as scratch registers.
> >
> > I should dig out my patches to clean up this interface. It's just
> > too brittle to have two macros that say what registers can be used
>
On Aug 13, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
>> It was discovered that with the attached test case compiled with -O2
>> -funroll-loops, the regrename pass renamed one of the registers ($2)
>> to $8 that was not saved by the prologue.
>>
>> The attached patch fixes it by defining mac
Robert Suchanek writes:
> Hi,
>
> It was discovered that with the attached test case compiled with -O2
> -funroll-loops, the regrename pass renamed one of the registers ($2)
> to $8 that was not saved by the prologue.
>
> The attached patch fixes it by defining macro HARD_REGNO_RENAME_OK
> that re
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Fortune [mailto:matthew.fort...@imgtec.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 7:20 AM
> To: Robert Suchanek; Moore, Catherine
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH][MIPS] Fix register renaming in the interrupt handler
I'd like to give Catherine chance to review this, I notice a couple
of formatting nits in the test case:
Robert Suchanek writes:
> a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/mips/interrupt_handler-bug-1.c
> b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/mips/interrupt_handler-bug-1.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..877d00c
Hi,
It was discovered that with the attached test case compiled with -O2
-funroll-loops,
the regrename pass renamed one of the registers ($2) to $8 that was not
saved by the prologue.
The attached patch fixes it by defining macro HARD_REGNO_RENAME_OK that returns
zero iff the current function is
12 matches
Mail list logo
