From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3029 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2016 12:37:41 -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 3016 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jan 2016 12:37:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=bitfields X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:37:39 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBBF013912; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:37:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz ([10.3.113.3]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u0CCbbMD030889 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:37:38 -0500 Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u0CCbYFm002933; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:37:35 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id u0CCbX4k002932; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 13:37:33 +0100 Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:37:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: James Greenhalgh Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Be less conservative in process_{output,input}_constraints (PR target/65689) Message-ID: <20160112123733.GF3017@tucnak.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20150408210059.GZ19273@tucnak.redhat.com> <20160112123020.GA16600@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160112123020.GA16600@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-01/txt/msg00706.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 12:30:20PM +0000, James Greenhalgh wrote: > > 2015-04-08 Jakub Jelinek > > > > PR target/65689 > > * genpreds.c (struct constraint_data): Add maybe_allows_reg and > > maybe_allows_mem bitfields. > > (maybe_allows_none_start, maybe_allows_none_end, > > maybe_allows_reg_start, maybe_allows_reg_end, maybe_allows_mem_start, > > maybe_allows_mem_end): New variables. > > (compute_maybe_allows): New function. > > (add_constraint): Use it to initialize maybe_allows_reg and > > maybe_allows_mem fields. > > (choose_enum_order): Sort the non-is_register/is_const_int/is_memory/ > > is_address constraints such that those that allow neither mem nor > > reg come first, then those that only allow reg but not mem, then > > those that only allow mem but not reg, then the rest. > > (write_allows_reg_mem_function): New function. > > (write_tm_preds_h): Call it. > > * stmt.c (parse_output_constraint, parse_input_constraint): Use > > the generated insn_extra_constraint_allows_reg_mem function > > instead of always setting *allows_reg = true; *allows_mem = true; > > for unknown extra constraints. > > Hi Jakub, > > This applies clean to gcc-5-branch. I've bootstrapped and tested it on > x86_64-none-linux-gnu, aarch64-none-linux-gnu and arm-none-linux-gnueabihf > with no problems. > > Is this OK to commit to gcc-5-branch so I can close out PR 65689? Ok, thanks. Jakub