From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7880 invoked by alias); 17 May 2004 06:52:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7872 invoked by uid 48); 17 May 2004 06:52:54 -0000 Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 19:33:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040517065254.7871.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040516100200.15473.kazu@cs.umass.edu> References: <20040516100200.15473.kazu@cs.umass.edu> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/15473] Sibcall optimization for libcalls. X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg01815.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-05-17 06:52 ------- This is not a tree-ssa problem, we don't even know about libcalls at the tree level (that's the whole point! or at least, one of them). If anything, this is an rtl optimization problem. This also is not code pessimization, just lack of an optimization. Please use that keyword when we _pessimize_ your code (ie "make it worse than without optimization"). You might be able to fix this when the tree profiling branch is merged. At that point you'd have the CFG, and perhaps (but I'm not sure) you can teach calls.c to build the libcall as a sibcall. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|tree-optimization |rtl-optimization Summary|[tree-ssa] Sibcall |Sibcall optimization for |optimization for libcalls. |libcalls. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15473