From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5065 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2011 21:01:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 5055 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Aug 2011 21:01:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (HELO mtagate1.uk.ibm.com) (194.196.100.161) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 21:01:28 +0000 Received: from d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.38.233]) by mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p75L1QAu007490 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 21:01:26 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p75L1QZV2494574 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:01:26 +0100 Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p75L1QqM030119 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 15:01:26 -0600 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with SMTP id p75L1PHO030093; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 15:01:25 -0600 Message-Id: <201108052101.p75L1PHO030093@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:01:25 +0200 Subject: Re: [named address] ice-on-valid: in postreload.c:reload_cse_simplify_operands To: dj@redhat.com (DJ Delorie) Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 21:01:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: avr@gjlay.de, gcc@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <201108052046.p75Kkt1Q027756@greed.delorie.com> from "DJ Delorie" at Aug 05, 2011 04:46:55 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg00133.txt.bz2 DJ Delorie wrote: > Was this reproducible for m32c also? I can test it if so... The patch simply passes the destination address space through to MODE_CODE_BASE_REG_CLASS and REGNO_MODE_CODE_OK_FOR_BASE_P, to allow targets to make register allocation decisions based on address space. As long as m32c doesn't implement those, just applying the patch wouldn't change anything. But if that capability *would* be helpful on your target, it would certainly be good if you could try it out ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com