From: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
To: Joern Rennecke <amylaar@cygnus.co.uk>
Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>,
Joern Rennecke <amylaar@pasanda.cygnus.co.uk>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: SUBREGs and modes
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:30:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000802182923.B20604@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200008021613.RAA25138@phal.cygnus.co.uk>
> This implies that there are cases where you have a subreg of a reg with
> multiple words, where not all bits of a word are stored to.
Note that this is not quite an case I am talking about. My case
(subreg:HI (reg:DI) 1)
is not paradoxical (at least in the definition of word paradoxical I understand
to)
>
> Note that nested subregs are not allowed, so we really *have* to express
> the access of a single smaller-than-word part of a multi word register
> with a single SUBREG.
I know, thats why I am asking - otherwise I would send patch killing them.
>
> Do you have a suggestion how to make the documentation more clear on that
> count?
Don't know - perhaps it would be better to wait for the SUBREG_BYTE patches.
The prbolem I am having is that we prohibit SUBREGs of const_int s lurking
around the RTL stream and currently gcse is creating them, since it fails
to simplify the SUBREGs of constants substitued to registers with
NON-SImode and WORDNUM nonzero. This also disables any const propagation on these
beast too - in the CSE, gcse and combine :(
So I am asking basically whether:
1) it is better to keep this issue and wait for SUBREG_BYTE
2) update documentation and make cse/gcse/combine to handle them
3) avoid the (this is impossible)
I will probably pick 2) since otherwise my checker will cry (I am having function
to check corectness of rtx expression and trying to prevent gcc from creating
incorrect ones)
If you have some ideas for the docs, let me know.
Honza
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-08-02 9:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-08-02 5:49 Jan Hubicka
2000-08-02 5:58 ` Jakub Jelinek
2000-08-02 8:39 ` Joern Rennecke
2000-08-02 8:49 ` Jan Hubicka
2000-08-02 9:13 ` Joern Rennecke
2000-08-02 9:30 ` Jan Hubicka [this message]
2000-08-02 12:40 ` Geoff Keating
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20000802182923.B20604@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
--to=jh@suse.cz \
--cc=amylaar@cygnus.co.uk \
--cc=amylaar@pasanda.cygnus.co.uk \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).