From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2372 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2011 18:32:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 2363 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Apr 2011 18:32:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from 63.mail-out.ovh.net (HELO 63.mail-out.ovh.net) (91.121.185.56) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:32:41 +0000 Received: (qmail 16306 invoked by uid 503); 14 Apr 2011 19:22:30 -0000 Received: from b7.ovh.net (HELO mail409.ha.ovh.net) (213.186.33.57) by 63.mail-out.ovh.net with SMTP; 14 Apr 2011 19:22:30 -0000 Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queueout) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 14 Apr 2011 20:32:39 +0200 Received: from ip31.capo.montpellier-agglo.com (HELO ?192.168.10.116?) (lrouge@menta.fr@91.213.82.31) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 14 Apr 2011 20:32:38 +0200 Message-ID: <4DA73D99.5000800@menta.fr> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:55:00 -0000 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Laurent_Roug=E9?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; fr; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric Botcazou CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Reintroduce -mflat option on SPARC References: <4D64F83B.5060704@menta.fr> <201104121938.44734.ebotcazou@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <201104121938.44734.ebotcazou@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 4451245283056494153 X-Ovh-Remote: 91.213.82.31 (ip31.capo.montpellier-agglo.com) X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net) Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg01116.txt.bz2 >> This patch reintroduce the -mflat option on SPARC. The -mfalt option was >> deprecated in february 2004 with GCC 3.4.6. Now, with the support of >> LEON processor on GCC, this option has found a new interest. > Just a couple of remarks: > - the epilogue isn't fully RTL-ized, > - delay slot filling for epilogue doesn't work: DELAY_SLOTS_FOR_EPILOGUE isn't > defined anymore so defining ELIGIBLE_FOR_EPILOGUE_DELAY is useless. > > I'm going to fix these minor issues, as well as try to refactor the code a bit. Please, it will be interesting to see corrections. > One question: I presume there is no point in supporting -mflat in 64-bit mode > for the time being? Right, -mflat option should only be for 32-bit SPARC target. Regards, Laurent.