This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
I use arm-ecos-elf-gcc v. 3.1 to compile C++ code. The compiler options are -g -Os -mthumb -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -nostartfiles -Wa,-ahlms=$test.lst -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions For the function: static void bcpy( char* to, const char* from, int length ) { for( int i = 0; i < length; i++ ) to[i] = from[i]; } I have got the next compilation result: 63 0018 10B5 push {r4, lr} 64 001a 041C mov r4, r0 65 001c 081C mov r0, r1 66 001e 111C mov r1, r2 67 .LM5: 68 .LBB3: 69 .LBB4: 70 0020 0022 mov r2, #0 71 0022 8A42 cmp r2, r1 72 0024 04DA bge .L9 73 .L7: 74 .LM6: 75 0026 835C ldrb r3, [r0, r2] 76 0028 A354 strb r3, [r4, r2] 77 .LM7: 78 002a 0132 add r2, r2, #1 79 002c 8A42 cmp r2, r1 80 002e FADB blt .L7 81 .L9: 82 .LM8: 83 @ sp needed for prologue 84 0030 10BD pop {r4, pc} The result is very strange from my point of view: there are a few excessive register copying which should be avoided by register scheduler. What do you think: the gcc register scheduler has some bug or the machine description is guilty? Eugene. ------ Want more information? See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/ Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |