From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10556 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2003 08:57:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10545 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2003 08:57:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.18.106) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2003 08:57:43 -0000 Received: from camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (kampanus.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.18.107]) by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with SMTP id 7361A4E2EF; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 10:57:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 9 Apr 2003 10:57:43 +0200 Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 09:45:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Eric Botcazou Cc: Jan Hubicka , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Reload bug Message-ID: <20030409085743.GE9102@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <200304081937.16859.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <20030408212528.GC11492@kam.mff.cuni.cz> <200304090804.30147.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200304090804.30147.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2 > > No, it is valid for high parts too as long as the register is possible > > (imagine the xmm being replaced by eax). > > Did I forget to say that this example is bogus? The logic doesn't of course > trigger for %eax so we don't pessimize anything in that case. What would prevent it from match on (subreg:DI (reg eax) 4)? That was the original problem that made me to change the behaviour (we can't reload instructions needing two such subregged operands in -fPIC as we simply run out of registers) Honza > > -- > Eric Botcazou