From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-93076-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 27925 invoked by alias); 19 Mar 2004 17:55:35 -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 27899 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2004 17:55:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM) (217.40.111.177)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2004 17:55:34 -0000
Received: from mace ([192.168.1.25]) by NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0);
	 Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:54:47 +0000
From: "Dave Korn" <dk@artimi.com>
To: "'Joern Rennecke'" <joern.rennecke@superh.com>
Cc: <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: RE: How can INITIAL_FRAME_POINTER_OFFSET be made correct?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 19:49:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <200403191724.i2JHOHB14108@linsvr1.uk.superh.com>
Message-ID: <NUTMEGVrRQvXlaoY99E000001c0@NUTMEG.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2004 17:54:47.0984 (UTC) FILETIME=[44FFF300:01C40DDB]
X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01157.txt.bz2


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joern Rennecke
> Sent: 19 March 2004 17:24

> If you mention LINK_REGS in EPILOGUE_USES, you'll have to 
> assume that it is always 'used', and use REG_N_SETS to check 
> if it's clobbered.

  Hmmm, actually there's no definition for EPILOGUE_USES at all, despite the
fact that it does actually use LINK_REGNUM.  Dunno if that's really  a
problem or not.  It *is* marked as a CALL_USED register.

> Otherwise, I'd suggest setting a watchpoint to find out where 
> exactly regs_ever_live[LINK_REGS] is set.

  Yeh, I guess that'll give me the definitive answer.  I was kinda hoping
that someone would be able to give me a definite answer about the scope of
validity of regs_ever_live, such as "It's only guaranteed to be completely
up-to-date by the time emit_prologue is called".

  ISTM that it would be very bad of the docs to suggest using regs_ever_live
at a time when the information in it was incorrect or incomplete, but maybe
it's not meant to change after IFPO and it's just a bug that is causing the
inconsistency.




    cheers, 
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....