From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-89569-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 897 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2004 17:26:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
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
Received: (qmail 851 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2004 17:26:19 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO overta.ru) (195.151.108.147)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2004 17:26:19 -0000
Received: from [217.65.211.233] (HELO localhost.localdomain)
  by overta.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.6)
  with ESMTP id 9543301; Tue, 20 Jan 2004 20:26:18 +0300
To: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
Cc: Denis Chertykov <denisc@overta.ru>,
	  Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo@libero.it>,  gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [new-ra] Development status?
References: <22e301c3dd71$1875c480$34b82997@bagio>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0401191023350.3429@wotan.suse.de>
	<n08i60kk.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0401201747140.3429@wotan.suse.de>
From: Denis Chertykov <denisc@overta.ru>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:26:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0401201747140.3429@wotan.suse.de>
Message-ID: <8yk21qi8.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01524.txt.bz2

Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> writes:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Denis Chertykov wrote:
> 
> > 4. Then, allocator must have a support for register elimination.
> 
> Indeed, I forgot.
> 
> > Michael ! I have completed the patch which calculate register classes
> > preferences as regclass (not as pre-reload).
> 
> Cool.
> 
> > Yes. I have converted regclass routines to work with webs.
> 
> I had hoped there would be something better than regclass on
> webs. *sniff*

I'm too, but I can't imagine another way to got a quick comparison of
results pre-reload classes and regclass classes.

> > I was interested in comparision of results given by pre-reload based
> > web_class and regclass based web_class.
> 
> They at least shouldn't be worse, I think, are they?

The results are *equal* !!! (for x86)
Exclude a few difficult cases.

> > Are you ready to look at patch and results ?
> 
> Yes, please.

I can send it tomorrow morning. (I forgot the code at my work. The
mail will be from gazovik@overta.ru)

After you got the patch and seeing on results I would discuss the
problem of register classes in new-ra. Is this OK ?

Denis.