From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9976 invoked by alias); 7 May 2010 21:16:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 9968 invoked by uid 22791); 7 May 2010 21:16:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 May 2010 21:16:23 +0000 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o47LGI60019605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 7 May 2010 17:16:19 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o47LGIpm031481; Fri, 7 May 2010 17:16:18 -0400 Received: from [172.17.80.3] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o47LGG5b006014; Fri, 7 May 2010 17:16:17 -0400 Message-ID: <4BE48320.5040408@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 21:16:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100330 Fedora/3.0.4-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg McGary CC: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: where are caller-save addresses legitimized? References: <4BE20304.6020906@ericsson.com> <4BE235A2.6050900@redhat.com> <4BE238D6.5040703@ericsson.com> <4BE24519.3000006@redhat.com> <4BE47E08.70505@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <4BE47E08.70505@ericsson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-05/txt/msg00135.txt.bz2 On 05/07/10 14:54, Greg McGary wrote: > > Unfortunately, that didn't yield any clues. I'll proceed by building > some well-established RISCy target and see what it does in similar > circumstances. The canonical testcase for caller-save on risc targets was sparc FP code -- the older sparcs didn't have any call-saved FP regs. Jeff