[Please don't top post.]
> Please undo that change. You made the test for that heavily used
> function even more expensive.
It generates machine code identical to the original.
I suspect David is refering to execution time of the compiler itself
And I am talking about the machine code of
Please undo that change. You made the test for that heavily used
function even more expensive.
It generates machine code identical to the original.
Segher
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> I changed the test to INT_REGNO_P || FP_REGNO_P; this isn't
> totally obvious since INT_REGNO_P includes ap and fp, but those
> are covered by the other arms of the conditional already: in
> fact, it probably would be better to rewrite
This is okay, but gpc_reg_operand in predicates.md needs something
better than a magic "64" constant in the test. Should this be a
comment or a new symbolic value related the max/last FPR or number of
general registers?
The test assumes a lot about the relative ordering of the
various regnos (l
This is okay, but gpc_reg_operand in predicates.md needs something
better than a magic "64" constant in the test. Should this be a
comment or a new symbolic value related the max/last FPR or number of
general registers?
The test assumes a lot about the relative ordering of the
various regnos (l
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Segher Boessenkool
wrote:
> gcc/
> * config/rs6000/constraints.md: Delete "q" constraint.
> * config/rs6000/dfp.md (movsd_hardfloat, movsd_softfloat):
> Delete the "q" alternative.
> * config/rs6000/predicates.md (gpc_reg_operand): R
gcc/
* config/rs6000/constraints.md: Delete "q" constraint.
* config/rs6000/dfp.md (movsd_hardfloat, movsd_softfloat):
Delete the "q" alternative.
* config/rs6000/predicates.md (gpc_reg_operand): Replace
MQ_REGNO with the literal 64.
* config/rs6000/r
