Re: How to deal with unrecognizable RTL code

[Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>]

daniel tian wrote:
>
> it will be called in GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS, and
> LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS. So like the following unrecognizable RTL
> has gone.
>   
I would _strongly_ recommend you initially develop your port without
defining LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS. Let reload work in the way it was
intended, particularly since I haven't seen anything to-date which would
indicate your chip has characteristics which reload can't handle.

Once your port is working well, you can go back and define
LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS to optimize handling of reloads -- and because
your port was working prior to defining LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS any
new failures are most likely due to an improper definition of
LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS (which is easy to do given you have to know
how reload works to properly implement LEGITIMIZE_RELOAD_ADDRESS).


[ ... ]
>
> The RTL is at the beginning of the function, and R5 is used to pass
> parameter. So I think maybe should also trace the parameter passing
> function.
>   
Again, the best thing you can do is find the first dump file where these
problematical insns exist. That would be a huge step forward.

jeff