On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 11:23:43AM +0800, TeLeMan wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 02:58, Stefan Weil <w...@mail.berlios.de> wrote: > > Is patch 4 (call handling) needed, or is it an optimization? > > If it is needed, the tcg disassembler has to be extended as well. > > In fact tci has no stack and robber registers and doesn't need > simulate the CPU work. I am trying to remove tcg_reg_alloc() in > tcg_reg_alloc_op() & tcg_reg_alloc_call() and access the temporary > variables directly in tci.
'Doesn't need' doesn't necessarily mean 'is better without', though. Perhaps it's best for TCI to reflect the behaviour of other TCG targets where possible? (You can then compare the code that is generated with different numbers of registers, and different constraints, etc.) Cheers, -- Stuart Brady
