From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-169781-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31532 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2011 15:40:56 -0000
Received: (qmail 31512 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Aug 2011 15:40:55 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,TW_ZJ
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-qw0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-qw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:40:41 +0000
Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5so79451qwh.20        for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.72.87 with SMTP id l23mr5283751qcj.9.1312904440631; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.29.7 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 08:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFULd4Y5z6v2DtFCWgdLxDLE3eX-Pd=9iFtWGmJu9tvYOb33rA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFULd4byLVikq6tTudXVUpqLvaC6vTsM3Kd=1eT0fTka=ZOKgg@mail.gmail.com>	<201108081530.p78FUAgM029764@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>	<CAFULd4Y5mie9zBP5TbvFpuDxSwbKpp=n3sh8iyr3UpSfiqiYxQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAFULd4Y5z6v2DtFCWgdLxDLE3eX-Pd=9iFtWGmJu9tvYOb33rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:40:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOpckAAhBKD4RQcTfYo1DjCzv4Dc2cUtzjVuRaAbMh+3GA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH, i386]: Allow zero_extended addresses (+ problems with reload and offsetable address, "o" constraint)
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Cc: Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, 	GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg00188.txt.bz2

On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:40 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Moves are special as far as reload is concerned. =A0If 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. =A0Instead, 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.)
>>
>> Whoa, indeed.
>>
>> Using attached patch that reloads memory address instead of going
>> through XMM register, the code for the testcase improves from:
>
> Committed to mainline with following ChangeLog entry:
>
> 2011-08-09 =A0Uros Bizjak =A0<ubizjak@gmail.com>
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0PR target/49781
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* config/i386/i386.md (reload_noff_load): New.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(reload_noff_store): Ditto.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_secondary_reload): Use
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0CODE_FOR_reload_noff_load and CODE_FOR_reload_noff_store t=
o handle
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0double-word moves from/to non-offsetable addresses instead=
 of
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0generating XMM temporary.
>
> Re-bootstrapped and re-tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu {,-m32}.
>

No regressions on x32 with GCC, glibc and SPEC CPU 2K/2006.

Thanks.

--=20
H.J.