From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24336 invoked by alias); 10 May 2011 20:49:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 24264 invoked by uid 22791); 10 May 2011 20:49:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO mel.act-europe.fr) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 May 2011 20:49:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D534ECB0244; Tue, 10 May 2011 22:49:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eiLqURH3c4f2; Tue, 10 May 2011 22:49:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (bon31-9-83-155-120-49.fbx.proxad.net [83.155.120.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mel.act-europe.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB584CB025F; Tue, 10 May 2011 22:49:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Eric Botcazou To: Denis Chertykov Subject: Re: [AVR] Couple of tweaks Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 03:13:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: "Weddington, Eric" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Anatoly Sokolov , "Georg-Johann Lay" References: <201104181257.05019.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <8D64F155F1C88743BFDC71288E8E2DA801CF3CF5@csomb01.corp.atmel.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201105102242.46728.ebotcazou@adacore.com> 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00797.txt.bz2 > The port don't have to disable subregs in legitimate_address_p. They don't have not to disable them either, they do what's better for them. > So, the current avr_legitimate_address_p is correct. It's just making impossible to compile some code. > May be it's GCC core bug ? It's more of a reload limitation, it cannot find any spill register. -- Eric Botcazou