From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3797 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2019 15:53:06 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 3788 invoked by uid 89); 2 Nov 2019 15:53:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*c:ISO-8859-1, H*f:sk:52f7f0c, H*f:sk:5DB9E51, H*f:sk:78b73cb X-HELO: mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de Received: from mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de (HELO mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de) (81.169.146.183) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 02 Nov 2019 15:53:04 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1572709982; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=gjlay.de; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:From:Date:Message-ID: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=QR31HQRdNnZbQTLTUK3DvEHZ1PZT+qxhe1RD8DnveSU=; b=MGJEt+wgGqQIih3iSsj/NfqXwIyuo32X2PTOFZMQ3RMZ+yRSZz401lqdo9s2TLgbw0 9CjdCECiK2ucV9pTqUsuH3SRYDu3+jWCQmOUFOnBCPSotPFgvXwp+A6x9m3qGn2BR61F Xq3iRxG7EA8Cfy0tgmLNdsEwMrLik5BE9XSPKd7jBWqhwRQxp1UYr/0fDdtubjAbdGVJ uI3OrsDd9I5x2aCXcHYySekn3DEpA8ZYMxVB52UN5DWflsfBq3kr9YRMeIF6lnBM2kz6 qNSyvkQqyYvaFzWXLyLNfzm8jfKjKKmuENTZyTt2uVrJod9qQaNGH8kLYkFJIro3hTPL H/oQ== Received: from [192.168.2.100] by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 44.29.0 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id z06ddevA2FqxAWq (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Sat, 2 Nov 2019 16:52:59 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5DBDA601.6080503@gcc.gnu.org> Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2019 15:53:00 -0000 From: Georg-Johann Lay User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Segher Boessenkool CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: cc0 -> CCmode questions References: <78b73cb4-2d3f-2e71-c334-8a3cba768c55@physik.fu-berlin.de> <5DB9E51B.40909@gcc.gnu.org> <52f7f0ca-7dd2-0cf6-0b9a-e08852b7301f@linux.ibm.com> <5DBB4B51.3040101@gcc.gnu.org> <8f8eed9b-3e0f-9bd1-bd49-3f4c2a615cee@physik.fu-berlin.de> <5DBB6443.70407@gcc.gnu.org> <20191101010608.GC28442@gate.crashing.org> In-Reply-To: <20191101010608.GC28442@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2019-11/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 Segher Boessenkool schrieb: >> Btw, does GCC support clobbering registers in branches (or >> cbranch4 for that matter)? This requirement would come up when >> transitioning avr to cc_mode because cbranches would live post reload. > > Of course. You cannot have *reloads* on branches, that is all. > > Segher Does this also apply to input reloads? Suppose cbranch with constraints like "d,r" "n,r" for the operands to be compared, where d is a register class that can be compared against immediate, but registers in r can't be compared to n in general. For a case #2 target (only ccmode clobbers before reload), reload might generate an input reload for the constant in the cbranch. So this is for bidden? Johann