... and I managed to confuse myself about which LRA issue I had
approval for on gcc-5-branch, and checked it in. Sorry. If I don't
hear back until tomorrow I'll revert it.
Sorry, Bernd. I should be more clear too. The patch is ok for any GCC
version with lra-remat.c (it includes gcc-5 and comi
On 02/16/2016 04:20 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 02/15/2016 02:13 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 02/04/2016 09:27 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
After a few false starts, I came up with the patch below, which keeps
track of not just the candidate insn, but also an activation insn, and
chooses candid
On 02/15/2016 02:13 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
On 02/04/2016 09:27 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
After a few false starts, I came up with the patch below, which keeps
track of not just the candidate insn, but also an activation insn, and
chooses candidates only if they are both available and activ
On 02/04/2016 09:27 PM, Vladimir Makarov wrote:
After a few false starts, I came up with the patch below, which keeps
track of not just the candidate insn, but also an activation insn, and
chooses candidates only if they are both available and active. Besides
passing a new arg to create_cand, the
On 02/04/2016 12:17 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
In this PR, we have, at an intermediate stage during LRA (before
create_cands):
(insn 420 (set (reg:HI 276 [orig:132 g.2_118 ] [132])
(reg:HI 132 [ g.2_118 ])) 88 {*movhi_internal}
(nil))
[]
(insn 436 (set (reg/v:HI 290 [orig:87 g ]
In this PR, we have, at an intermediate stage during LRA (before
create_cands):
(insn 420 (set (reg:HI 276 [orig:132 g.2_118 ] [132])
(reg:HI 132 [ g.2_118 ])) 88 {*movhi_internal}
(nil))
[]
(insn 436 (set (reg/v:HI 290 [orig:87 g ] [87])
(reg/v:HI 87 [ g ]))
(insn 14 (
