From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14475 invoked by alias); 7 Jul 2011 07:43:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 14453 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jul 2011 07:43:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,TW_TX X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-fx0-f49.google.com (HELO mail-fx0-f49.google.com) (209.85.161.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 07:42:50 +0000 Received: by fxd20 with SMTP id 20so716536fxd.22 for ; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.86.144 with SMTP id s16mr821726fal.20.1310024568676; Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richards-thinkpad (gbibp9ph1--blueice3n2.emea.ibm.com [195.212.29.84]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j23sm2158376fai.39.2011.07.07.00.42.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:42:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Richard Sandiford To: Bernd Schmidt Mail-Followup-To: Bernd Schmidt ,GCC Patches , rdsandiford@googlemail.com Cc: GCC Patches Subject: Re: [1/11] Use targetm.shift_truncation_mask more consistently References: <4E0E0310.60406@codesourcery.com> <4E0E0389.5040505@codesourcery.com> <877h7vwagc.fsf@firetop.home> <4E14F649.4020404@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 08:07:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4E14F649.4020404@codesourcery.com> (Bernd Schmidt's message of "Thu, 07 Jul 2011 01:56:57 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00426.txt.bz2 Bernd Schmidt writes: > On 07/06/11 20:06, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> Bernd Schmidt writes: >>> At some point we've grown a shift_truncation_mask hook, but we're not >>> using it everywhere we're masking shift counts. This patch changes the >>> instances I found. >> >> The documentation reads: >> >> Note that, unlike @code{SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED}, this function does >> @emph{not} apply to general shift rtxes; it applies only to instructions >> that are generated by the named shift patterns. > > Ouch. That is one seriously misnamed hook then. Yeah. I take the blame for that, sorry :-( >> I think you need to update the documentation, and check that existing >> target definitions do in fact apply to shift rtxes as well. > > Until I can do that, I've reverted this patch. Thanks. Richard