From: Steven Bosscher
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 01:19:11 +0100
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> One idea that occurred to me was perhaps to extend
>> define_register_constraint such that an extra condition can be
>> specified. So for sparc's constraint "U" it would evaluate
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
> One idea that occurred to me was perhaps to extend
> define_register_constraint such that an extra condition can be
> specified. So for sparc's constraint "U" it would evaluate to
> GENERAL_REGS but also express the condition that the hard reg
On 12-11-07 5:39 PM, David Miller wrote:
Vlad, I wanted to make you aware of the following because it's
a major barrier for using LRA on sparc at this time. I therefore
do not think moving to LRA on this target is possible in the 4.8
timeframe, which is fine. The situation is described complete
Vlad, I wanted to make you aware of the following because it's
a major barrier for using LRA on sparc at this time. I therefore
do not think moving to LRA on this target is possible in the 4.8
timeframe, which is fine. The situation is described completely
in the comment I am adding in the patch
