From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21720 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2010 23:21:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 21694 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jul 2010 23:21:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-qw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 23:21:22 +0000 Received: by qwg8 with SMTP id 8so2281990qwg.20 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:21:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.80.203 with SMTP id u11mr6680585qak.126.1279668080160; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:21:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.29.9 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:20:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C462BB6.3040006@redhat.com> References: <4C4035C3.9080305@codesourcery.com> <4C40A5BD.9080208@redhat.com> <4C40F005.3060507@codesourcery.com> <4C41BD52.5040905@codesourcery.com> <4C447222.7080500@redhat.com> <4C44C00F.3070201@redhat.com> <4C45CFA0.9070404@redhat.com> <4C462BB6.3040006@redhat.com> From: Sebastian Pop Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 23:21:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: x86_64 varargs setup jump table To: Richard Henderson Cc: "H.J. Lu" , Bernd Schmidt , GCC Patches , ubizjak@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2010-07/txt/msg01613.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 18:05, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 07/20/2010 09:32 AM, Richard Henderson wrote: >> On 07/19/2010 02:13 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: >>> This bootstraps; regression test starting now. >>> >>> Obviously there's some patterns in i386.md that should be removed >>> along with this, were this patch to go in. >> >> A slightly different patch that passes regression testing. >> This also vanishes the patterns that should go. > > It was pointed out to me on IRC that x86_64 bootstrap is still broken. > So unless there are objections to this patch, I'll commit it tomorrow > morning (GMT+7). =A0We can debate the performance impact afterward. I am also testing SPEC 2006 with your last patch on amd64-linux. Sebastian