> I don't think this is suitable for the branch. Any reason why you
> can't work on the trunk?
The vendor's release is 4.5 based, and 4.6 has some performance
regressions with this chip. We'd like to sync up the FSF sources with
the minor patches the vendor is using, so that their customers can
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:07 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
>> This doesn't look like a regression fix. The changelog doesn't tell
>> if it is mere replacing macros by hooks, so please also attach the
>> patch.
>
> The original patch is here:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-10/msg00076.html
>
> It w
> This doesn't look like a regression fix. The changelog doesn't tell
> if it is mere replacing macros by hooks, so please also attach the
> patch.
The original patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-10/msg00076.html
It would need editing for 4.5, which I'll do if there's a good chance
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:05 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> May I backport this change to 4.5 ? rx-elf can use this for a
> performance boost (a separate 4.5 target patch would be needed for
> that)
This doesn't look like a regression fix. The changelog doesn't tell
if it is mere replacing macros by
May I backport this change to 4.5 ? rx-elf can use this for a
performance boost (a separate 4.5 target patch would be needed for
that)
2010-10-19 DJ Delorie
* doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_ASM_JUMP_ALIGN_MAX_SKIP): New.
(TARGET_ASM_LABEL_ALIGN_AFTER_BARRIER_MAX_SKIP): Change to hook
