On 22/04/14 18:13, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 22-04-14 18:18, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Tom de Vries writes:
>>
>>> On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
> 2. post_expand_call_insn.
> A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to
> CALL_INSN_FUNC
On 22-04-14 18:18, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
2. post_expand_call_insn.
A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets
Tom de Vries writes:
> On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> Tom de Vries writes:
>>> 2. post_expand_call_insn.
>>> A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to
>>> CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
>>
>> Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets should update
>> CALL_INSN
On 22-04-14 17:27, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Tom de Vries writes:
2. post_expand_call_insn.
A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets should update
CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE when emitting calls as part o
Tom de Vries writes:
> 2. post_expand_call_insn.
> A utility hook to facilitate adding the clobbers to CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
Why is this needed though? Like I say, I think targets should update
CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE when emitting calls as part of the call expander.
Splitting the functiona
On 17-04-14 18:49, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
I see. I guess your proposed solution is ok then.
Vladimir,
Richard,
I've updated the fuse-caller-save patch series to model non-callee call clobbers
in CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE.
There are 2 new hooks:
1. call_fusage_contains_non_callee_clobbers.
On 2014-04-17, 11:29 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Vladimir Makarov writes:
On 2014-04-16, 3:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
Vladimir,
All patches for the fuse-caller-save optimization have been ok-ed. The
only part
not approved is the MIPS-specific part.
The objection of Richard S. is not so much
Vladimir Makarov writes:
> On 2014-04-16, 3:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> Vladimir,
>>
>> All patches for the fuse-caller-save optimization have been ok-ed. The
>> only part
>> not approved is the MIPS-specific part.
>>
>> The objection of Richard S. is not so much the patch itself, but more the
On 2014-04-16, 3:19 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Vladimir,
>
> All patches for the fuse-caller-save optimization have been ok-ed. The only
> part
> not approved is the MIPS-specific part.
>
> The objection of Richard S. is not so much the patch itself, but more the idea
> of the hook fn_other_hard_
On 04/16/14 13:41, Richard Sandiford wrote:
IMO CALL_INSN_FUNCTION_USAGE is like a "varargs" part of the call pattern.
In other words it's a way of allowing the set of uses and clobbers to
vary from call to call without having to define lots of different call
define_insns. If you look at it lik
Tom de Vries writes:
> Vladimir,
>
> All patches for the fuse-caller-save optimization have been ok-ed. The only
> part
> not approved is the MIPS-specific part.
>
> The objection of Richard S. is not so much the patch itself, but more the idea
> of the hook fn_other_hard_reg_usage.
>
> For clari
Vladimir,
All patches for the fuse-caller-save optimization have been ok-ed. The only part
not approved is the MIPS-specific part.
The objection of Richard S. is not so much the patch itself, but more the idea
of the hook fn_other_hard_reg_usage.
For clarity, I'm restating the current hook defin
12 matches
Mail list logo
