public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nickc@redhat.com,
	nobody@gcc.gnu.org, pb@nexus.co.uk, rearnsha@arm.com
Subject: Re: target/7856: [arm] invalid offset in constant pool reference
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 03:56:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020909105644.20398.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)

Synopsis: [arm] invalid offset in constant pool reference

State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: rearnsha
State-Changed-When: Mon Sep  9 03:56:43 2002
State-Changed-Why:
    Confirmed as a bug.
    
    The problem comes about due to a change that Nick made to 
    try to improve the performance of prologue and epilogue code.
    His change means that if the link register is not clobbered then
    it is never saved on the stack, even if other call-saved registers
    need to be saved.  The consequence of this is that we 
    sometimes end up generating 2-instruction return sequences
    when we previously only generated a single instruction.
    
    Although at first sight this appears to be faster, it is not 
    necessarily the best soloution, particularly when the return
    is conditional, since we end up making the conditional
    sequence longer.
    
    The particular consequence of this change is that the length of the 'return' and 'conditional-return' instructions needs to take
    into account this longer sequence if the constant spilling code
    is to do its job correctly.
    
    However, I'm not yet convinced that Nick's change is for the
    best overall.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=7856


             reply	other threads:[~2002-09-09 10:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-09  3:56 rearnsha [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-11-01  7:00 rearnsha
2002-09-09  7:16 Richard Earnshaw
2002-09-08  6:46 pb

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020909105644.20398.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=nickc@redhat.com \
    --cc=nobody@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=pb@nexus.co.uk \
    --cc=rearnsha@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).