From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31859 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2005 21:20:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31770 invoked by uid 48); 12 Mar 2005 21:20:18 -0000 Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050312212018.31769.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "andrewhutchinson at cox dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20041031125117.18251.ralf_corsepius@rtems.org> References: <20041031125117.18251.ralf_corsepius@rtems.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/18251] unable to find a register to spill in class `POINTER_REGS' X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg01522.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From andrewhutchinson at cox dot net 2005-03-12 21:20 ------- (In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #17) I think it is always true but the original used the same predicate and test (so I played safe). The pattern only helps if it is a constant. I also thought it should handle variable block size. However, I found gcc already produces optimal code for that case without any help. > > Marek, can you review this bug, the attached patches, and possibly approve > > committing the fix? > > I'm looking into it right now. I'm not sure about one thing: should "movmemhi" > handle only constant block sizes, or variable block sizes too? If variable - > is it safe to assume nonzero? (now 0 means 65536) > > Operand 2 (block size) has the "const_int_operand" predicate - doesn't this > mean that (GET_CODE(operands[2]) == CONST_INT) is always true? > > Thanks, > Marek > -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18251