From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-166502-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 10614 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2011 13:50:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 10600 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jan 2011 13:50:40 -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; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:50:35 +0000
Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p0CDoXVO000428	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);	Wed, 12 Jan 2011 08:50:33 -0500
Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199])	by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0CDoXIm025241;	Wed, 12 Jan 2011 08:50:33 -0500
Received: from [10.3.113.59] (ovpn-113-59.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.59])	by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p0CDoVbm004532;	Wed, 12 Jan 2011 08:50:32 -0500
Message-ID: <4D2DB1A7.8000605@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:50:00 -0000
From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gidi Nave <gidi.nave.1@gmail.com>
CC: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Plus Reload
References: <AANLkTik2wJirOgyQ+ophpOhH-hjSv3K3Xj4DPrPk545v@mail.gmail.com>	<mcry66r5x7k.fsf@google.com>	<AANLkTi=S47fNp-1Mr8cfYS0-V3iRpN8xRrgGyE63FxR0@mail.gmail.com>	<mcr8vyr5u9v.fsf@google.com>	<AANLkTimrGVFRGkQddNj7FmAO9mT8na2VxFFgzGyfyC76@mail.gmail.com>	<mcrmxn74apa.fsf@google.com>	<AANLkTimXqGVkBbw=sGYSUFiz4zurv_=t6dWL4W4qFNSo@mail.gmail.com>	<mcraaj6zled.fsf@google.com> <AANLkTikxFVpdzXX1ATXRB+JQ8N8A0FbJG5b0jMx=Ztfj@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikxFVpdzXX1ATXRB+JQ8N8A0FbJG5b0jMx=Ztfj@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00142.txt.bz2

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/12/11 01:45, Gidi Nave wrote:

> 
> One more question:
> GCC usually knows how to handle cases which need decomposition of
> expressions due to architecture limitations.
> In my case it didn't know.
> How can I foreseen additional such cases, in order to avoid compilation crush?
I'm not sure there is a reasonable way other than experience and
intimate knowledge of how reload works.

I haven't done any measurements, but I see more questions/issues being
raised by developers doing their own ports with regards to reloading
than any other part of the compiler.

That's no great surprise, since reload is probably the nastiest pass of
the compiler and even those of us with significant experience still
struggle with corner case reload problems.

jeff
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNLbGiAAoJEBRtltQi2kC75ngIAKJJhYdYgQV2l0LsZCxUbhb9
OxHXr2CBbEZgpT6VRIrTJnJ51QEjxscLCBo0Ip/ZnpMiulb5S+hmyjrQJxXxEyPI
pF64uV6Gla0qcGgABrVkPWi6UEPDpvkrD0mljpcsqdK6tYtPFIww8sYMC+LecdUM
GMan7eXcKxgVu51c2xkp57afg9xuVcZXwHAcME74MkYC37vT0KGAPKpRIBum+ues
PL+2hOfa7wzQ6SbM9d7sVrU4o029IzWEgPPYwWVrw0NSQlIHbAnOf6Q0V+Y9jeeb
M36Vh/ynzExLmFq1kmESTEeOAqEg9r97mwaiaXPK4vYZEc3r9YMjq1rRUhEFO48=
=6tO+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----