From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10790 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2014 01:33:29 -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 10779 invoked by uid 89); 11 Feb 2014 01:33:29 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pa0-f48.google.com Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (HELO mail-pa0-f48.google.com) (209.85.220.48) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:33:27 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id kx10so6955771pab.7 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:33:25 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.66.139.196 with SMTP id ra4mr29483915pab.103.1392082405615; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:33:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from bubble.grove.modra.org ([101.166.26.37]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z10sm123460460pas.6.2014.02.10.17.33.23 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:33:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by bubble.grove.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 504B9EA00C1; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:03:20 +1030 (CST) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:33:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: David Edelsohn Cc: GCC Patches , Michael Meissner Subject: Re: [RS6000] power8 internal compiler errors Message-ID: <20140211013320.GG3386@bubble.grove.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: David Edelsohn , GCC Patches , Michael Meissner References: <20140210221833.GE3386@bubble.grove.modra.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00645.txt.bz2 On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 07:01:03PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Alan Modra wrote: > > Shouldn't addr_op2 also be set from find_replacement? Sorry, I thought after I sent the email that I should have added some explanation of why certain parts need find_replacement and others don't. We want just those parts of addresses that might have been reloaded. There's the case of the entire address being reloaded (actually, I'm not sure this one is needed) and then all the ones we do in the rs6000 backend in legitimize_reload_address. I think I found all the required parts but it certainly won't hurt if you check too. Calling find_replacement when not strictly necessary will slow down gcc a little.. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM