Thanks for the updates, they look good to me. Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com> writes: > @@ -100,8 +102,9 @@ > o for pseudos needing save/restore code around calls. > > If the split pseudo still has the same hard register as the > - original pseudo after the subsequent assignment pass, the opposite > - transformation is done on the same pass for undoing inheritance. */ > + original pseudo after the subsequent assignment pass or the > + original pseudo was split, the opposite transformation is done on > + the same pass for undoing inheritance. */
Looks like this should be "original pseudo was spilled" rather than "split". > @@ -2276,11 +2157,7 @@ process_alt_operands (int only_alternati > then. */ > if (! (REG_P (op) > && REGNO (op) >= FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER) > - && ! (const_to_mem && constmemok) > - /* We can reload the address instead of memory (so > - do not punish it). It is preferable to do to > - avoid cycling in some cases. */ > - && ! (MEM_P (op) && offmemok)) > + && ! (const_to_mem && constmemok)) > reject += 2; Sorry, I wasn't suggesting you change this. I think the old version was correct. I'll follow up on the other thread. Richard
