From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 113613 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2019 16:31:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 113527 invoked by uid 89); 14 Feb 2019 16:31:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=extent, speaking, H*f:sk:2055734, H*f:sk:2272324 X-HELO: smtp.eu.adacore.com Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO smtp.eu.adacore.com) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:30:58 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A8EE81339; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:30:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.eu.adacore.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MePUIGwHcmQT; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:30:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from polaris.localnet (bon31-6-88-161-99-133.fbx.proxad.net [88.161.99.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 08B4A8139A; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:30:55 +0100 (CET) From: Eric Botcazou To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [rs6000] 64-bit integer loads/stores and FP instructions Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 16:31:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1706475.9Hxzi0ARrC@polaris> In-Reply-To: <20190212123643.GS14180@gate.crashing.org> References: <2055734.X6m1ecN8ti@polaris> <2272324.4Y8jdj1CPR@polaris> <20190212123643.GS14180@gate.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-SW-Source: 2019-02/txt/msg01091.txt.bz2 > Yeah, something like that. It will need some serious testing, to make > sure we don't regress (including not regressing what that patch that took > them away was meant to do). I can arrange some testing, will you do the > patch though? I can do the patch and also (correctness) testing for 32-bit Linux. Another issue is the extent of the patch: practically speaking, putting back the '*' modifier before all the 'd' constraints would be sufficient, but the current setting is a bit inconsistent|*] so this could also be adjusted. [*] For example, in the *movdi_internal32 pattern, 2 'wi' constraints have it but not the other 2. Likewise for "wv'. -- Eric Botcazou