On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 06:31:35PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:17:29AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > It was just a bootstrap+regression check, so no new testcase was needed.
> > I don't remember what target, but powerpc (32+64, BE) probably.
>
> I'll bootstrap/r
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:17:29AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> It was just a bootstrap+regression check, so no new testcase was needed.
> I don't remember what target, but powerpc (32+64, BE) probably.
I'll bootstrap/regtest the patch on powerpc64 and powerpc64le then.
>
> > The testcase i
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 04:36:37PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:28:56AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > This used to not work, as mentioned in the original patch submission:
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/gcc/patch/52f14532eb742ac8d878a185a46a88da7b0326eb.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:28:56AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> This used to not work, as mentioned in the original patch submission:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/gcc/patch/52f14532eb742ac8d878a185a46a88da7b0326eb.1442588483.git.seg...@kernel.crashing.org/
> I wonder what changed?
Hi!
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 02:35:32PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> As mentioned in the PR, shrink-wrapping disqualifies for prologue
> placement basic blocks that have EDGE_CROSSING incoming edge.
> I don't see why that is necessary, those edges seem to be redirected
> just fine, both on x86_64
Hi!
As mentioned in the PR, shrink-wrapping disqualifies for prologue
placement basic blocks that have EDGE_CROSSING incoming edge.
I don't see why that is necessary, those edges seem to be redirected
just fine, both on x86_64 and powerpc64. In the former case, they
are usually conditional jumps
