From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7469 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2014 19:01:26 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 7442 invoked by uid 89); 23 Jun 2014 19:01:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 19:01:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s5NJ0bM1031408 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 23 Jun 2014 15:01:13 -0400 Received: from pike.twiddle.home (vpn-52-163.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.52.163]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s5NI3U9W030797; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 14:03:31 -0400 Message-ID: <53A86BF1.1000604@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 19:01:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ramana Radhakrishnan , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix 61565 -- cmpelim vs non-call exceptions References: <53A49957.9040403@redhat.com> <53A7F374.3010209@arm.com> <53A83340.1030505@redhat.com> <53A84E0E.3070303@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <53A84E0E.3070303@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-06/txt/msg01825.txt.bz2 On 06/23/2014 08:55 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > Agreed, this is why cmpelim looks interesting for Thumb1. (We may need another > hook or something to disable it in configurations we don't need it in, but you > know ... ) Yeah. Feel free to change targetm.flags_regnum from a variable to a function, when you get around to it. > Except that IT instructions aren't in Thumb1 or indeed v6-m :(. Ah, yes, of course. r~