From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18425 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2004 18:11:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 18354 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2004 18:11:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 Dec 2004 18:11:32 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iB5IBWql015668; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:11:32 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id iB5IBQr08665; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:11:26 -0500 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.27]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id iB5IBOso003694; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 13:11:25 -0500 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iB5IBOIc013245; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 10:11:24 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id iB5IBO2p013244; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 10:11:24 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 18:11:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Thomas Koenig Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: IA-64 and const Message-ID: <20041205181124.GA13226@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Thomas Koenig , gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <20041205120953.GA4731@meiner.onlinehome.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041205120953.GA4731@meiner.onlinehome.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00234.txt.bz2 On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 01:09:53PM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote: > what is the reason why > > const int answer=42; > > isn't put into a read-only section on the IA-64 (compare > http://gcc.gnu.org/PR18566 ) ? Can this be changed? Because it's quicker to load the value if it's placed in the small data section. Of course, Fortran doesn't *want* to load the value directly, so that doesn't do any good. It couldn't be changed arbitrarily, but it wouldn't be impossible to come up with some way for the Fortran front end to annotate its CONST_DECLs such that the target doesn't consider that particular object for the small data section. r~