Re: [rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix

cgd
2004-03-26T02:19:50Z

At Fri, 26 Mar 2004 00:28:27 +0000 (UTC), "Andrew Cagney" wrote:
> > At Thu, 25 Mar 2004 17:14:18 -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >>> Look at it this way, if the igen mechanism is used, gcc is able to
> >>> eliminate everything :-)
> > In the case of a single-architecture sim (i.e., not 'multi', then
> > yes), GCC will automatically eliminate the test.
> > In the case of a multiple-architecture sim, it won't.
>
> It still does (or at least can), trust me :-)

err, sorry, i think i misquoted you. What I meant to quote was:

> If there's another way of achieving the same effect, I'm interested.

I know that doing multi-arch checking entirely with different machine
attributes will eliminate the diff.

(actually, in that case, it's still "mostly," now that i think about
it. in multiple-MIPS-arch-capable sims, it still moves moves the arch
check up into sim_engine_run.)

cgd