Hi!
On 2024-03-21T12:20:38+0100, I wrote:
> On 2024-02-16T10:48:53-0800, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2024, at 2:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>>
>>> There is one special case, NVPTX, which is a TARGET_NO_REGISTER_ALLOCATION
>>> target. I think claiming for it that it is a lra target is stra
Hi!
On 2024-02-16T10:48:53-0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2024, at 2:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>
>> There is one special case, NVPTX, which is a TARGET_NO_REGISTER_ALLOCATION
>> target. I think claiming for it that it is a lra target is strange (even
>> though it effectively returns t
> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 11:16:22 +0100
> From: Jakub Jelinek
> Given the recent discussions on IRC started with Andrew P. mentioning that
> an asm goto outputs test should have { target lra } and the lra effective
> target in GCC 11/12 only returning 0 for PA and in 13/14 for PA/AVR, while
> we
On Feb 16, 2024, at 2:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> There is one special case, NVPTX, which is a TARGET_NO_REGISTER_ALLOCATION
> target. I think claiming for it that it is a lra target is strange (even
> though it effectively returns true for targetm.lra_p ()), unsure if it
> supports asm goto
On Feb 16, 2024, at 2:16 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> Given the recent discussions on IRC started with Andrew P. mentioning that
> an asm goto outputs test should have { target lra } and the lra effective
> target in GCC 11/12 only returning 0 for PA and in 13/14 for PA/AVR, while
> we clearly ha
Hi!
Given the recent discussions on IRC started with Andrew P. mentioning that
an asm goto outputs test should have { target lra } and the lra effective
target in GCC 11/12 only returning 0 for PA and in 13/14 for PA/AVR, while
we clearly have 14 other targets which don't support LRA and a couple
