From: Bob Wilson <bwilson@tensilica.com>
To: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [cft] subreg validation round 2
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 02:43:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <419BF869.2060807@tensilica.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041118005308.GC17083@bubble.modra.org>
Alan Modra wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:45:53AM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:18:41AM -0800, Bob Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>If so, should I change FUNCTION_ARG code to avoid
>>>returning a BLKmode reg? Should I wrap the REG in a PARALLEL?
>>
>>Presumably you didn't just return the SImode reg in the first place
>>because you want the three bytes in the high part of the register?
>>Then, yes, a PARALLEL should do.
>
>
> Or define a suitable BLOCK_REG_PADDING. At least, that used to work..
I'm looking into it, but from a quick check of various other ports, I'm
surprised that more of them aren't breaking. (Or maybe they are....) Many of
the FUNCTION_ARG implementations create a REG with whatever mode is specified as
an argument to FUNCTION_ARG, which is what the Xtensa code does. I'm not doing
anything special here.
The "smaller than a word struct argument" case that causes the ICE is actually
the easiest to handle. Ignoring the padding issue, a single SImode REG will
work. For a struct bigger than a word, I guess a PARALLEL is required to
specify each consecutive register separately (at least in the general case where
there is no mode of the right size). I can see why it should be that way, but
it was so much easier to just specify the first register with BLKmode....
Thanks for the suggestions.
--Bob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-18 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-17 18:58 Richard Henderson
2004-11-17 19:20 ` Bob Wilson
2004-11-17 19:58 ` Richard Henderson
2004-11-18 1:06 ` Alan Modra
2004-11-18 2:43 ` Bob Wilson [this message]
2004-11-18 16:23 ` Richard Sandiford
2004-11-19 21:39 ` Richard Henderson
2004-11-22 20:40 ` Richard Henderson
2004-11-17 22:32 ` Janis Johnson
2004-11-17 23:05 ` Andrew Pinski
2004-11-18 11:40 ` Alan Modra
2004-11-17 19:46 ` Eric Botcazou
2004-11-19 21:50 ` Richard Henderson
2004-11-19 22:43 ` Eric Botcazou
2004-11-19 22:46 ` Richard Henderson
2004-11-18 23:43 ` Kaz Kojima
2004-11-19 0:08 ` Janis Johnson
2004-11-17 19:19 Ulrich Weigand
[not found] <OF12E4E5CC.BDFB0F1C-ON41256F4F.0067F055-41256F4F.00682968@LocalDomain>
2004-11-17 21:42 ` Ulrich Weigand
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=419BF869.2060807@tensilica.com \
--to=bwilson@tensilica.com \
--cc=amodra@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rth@redhat.com \
/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).