From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-81635-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 32234 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2013 08:04:59 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <binutils.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 32221 invoked by uid 89); 18 Oct 2013 08:04:58 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-we0-f171.google.com
Received: from mail-we0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-we0-f171.google.com) (74.125.82.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:04:57 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f171.google.com with SMTP id t60so3304024wes.2        for <binutils@sourceware.org>; Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.180.100.33 with SMTP id ev1mr1823899wib.18.1382083493913;        Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([2.28.235.51])        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b7sm830890wiz.8.2013.10.18.01.04.52        for <multiple recipients>        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);        Fri, 18 Oct 2013 01:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com>
To: Chao-Ying Fu <Chao-Ying.Fu@imgtec.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Chao-Ying Fu <Chao-Ying.Fu@imgtec.com>,"'Maciej W. Rozycki'" <macro@codesourcery.com>,  "'binutils\@sourceware.org'" <binutils@sourceware.org>, rdsandiford@googlemail.com
Cc: "'Maciej W. Rozycki'" <macro@codesourcery.com>,  "'binutils\@sourceware.org'" <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reorder MSA branches
References: <81D57523CB07B24881D63DE650C6ED824C35B3F9@BADAG01.ba.imgtec.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 08:04:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <81D57523CB07B24881D63DE650C6ED824C35B3F9@BADAG01.ba.imgtec.org>	(Chao-Ying Fu's message of "Fri, 18 Oct 2013 00:18:04 +0000")
Message-ID: <878uxr6m3f.fsf@talisman.default>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00259.txt.bz2

Chao-Ying Fu <Chao-Ying.Fu@imgtec.com> writes:
> Version 2.
> Because the MSA registers share the FP registers (if the FPU is present),
> we combine FP and MSA register dependences together.

I think we should go for this one.  The patch looks good with the testcase
added to the testsuite.

One very minor formatting nit though:

> @@ -4161,7 +4161,8 @@ fpr_read_mask (const struct mips_cl_insn
>    unsigned long pinfo;
>    unsigned int mask;
>  
> -  mask = insn_reg_mask (ip, (1 << OP_REG_FP) | (1 << OP_REG_VEC),
> +  mask = insn_reg_mask (ip, (1 << OP_REG_FP) | (1 << OP_REG_VEC)
> +			    | (1 << OP_REG_MSA),
>  			insn_read_mask (ip->insn_mo));
>    pinfo = ip->insn_mo->pinfo;
>    /* Conservatively treat all operands to an FP_D instruction are doubles.
> @@ -4179,7 +4180,8 @@ fpr_write_mask (const struct mips_cl_ins
>    unsigned long pinfo;
>    unsigned int mask;
>  
> -  mask = insn_reg_mask (ip, (1 << OP_REG_FP) | (1 << OP_REG_VEC),
> +  mask = insn_reg_mask (ip, (1 << OP_REG_FP) | (1 << OP_REG_VEC)
> +			    | (1 << OP_REG_MSA),
>  			insn_write_mask (ip->insn_mo));
>    pinfo = ip->insn_mo->pinfo;
>    /* Conservatively treat all operands to an FP_D instruction are doubles.

In these two cases, please add an extra "(" (the GCC emacs indentation rule).

  mask = insn_reg_mask (ip, ((1 << OP_REG_FP) | (1 << OP_REG_VEC)
			     | (1 << OP_REG_MSA)),

Thanks,
Richard