From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5148 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2011 15:30:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 5132 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Aug 2011 15:30:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,TW_ZJ 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; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:30:14 +0000 Received: from d06nrmr1307.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1307.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.38.129]) by mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p78FUCp5022288; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 15:30:12 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1307.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p78FUBJP2510922; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 16:30:11 +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 p78FUBQN029777; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 09:30:11 -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 p78FUAgM029764; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 09:30:10 -0600 Message-Id: <201108081530.p78FUAgM029764@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:30:10 +0200 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH, i386]: Allow zero_extended addresses (+ problems with reload and offsetable address, "o" constraint) To: ubizjak@gmail.com (Uros Bizjak) Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:30:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org (GCC Development), hjl.tools@gmail.com (H.J. Lu) In-Reply-To: from "Uros Bizjak" at Aug 07, 2011 02:38:49 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/msg00167.txt.bz2 Uros Bizjak wrote: > Although, it would be nice for reload to subsequently fix CSE'd > non-offsetable memory by copying address to temporary reg (*as said in > the documentation*), we could simply require an XMM temporary for > TImode reloads to/from integer registers, and this fixes ICE for x32. Moves are special as far as reload is concerned. If there is already a move instruction present *before* reload, it will get fixed up according to its constraints as any other instruction. However, reload will *introduce* new moves as part of its operation, and those will *not* themselves get reloaded. Instead, reload simply assumes that every plain move will just succeed without requiring any reload; if this is not true, the target *must* provide a secondary reload for this move. (Note that the secondary reload could also work by reloading the target address into a temporary; that's up to the target to implement.) Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com