------- Comment #12 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-12-08 08:56 
-------
Subject: Bug 25268

Author: krebbel
Date: Thu Dec  8 08:56:24 2005
New Revision: 108220

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108220
Log:
2005-12-08  Andreas Krebbel  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
            Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        PR target/25268
        * config/s390/s390.c (s390_decompose_shift_count): Remove BITS
        argument.  Don't drop outer ANDs.
        (s390_extra_constraint_str, print_shift_count_operand): Adjust callers.
        * config/s390/s390-protos.h (s390_decompose_shift_count): Adjust
        prototype.
        * config/s390/predicates.md (setmem_operand): Remove.
        (shift_count_operand): Rename to...
        (shift_count_or_setmem_operand): ... this.  Adjust
        s390_decompose_shift_count caller.
        * config/s390/s390.md (<shift>di3_31_and, <shift>di3_64_and,
        ashrdi3_cc_31_and, ashrdi3_cconly_31_and, ashrdi3_31_and,
        ashrdi3_cc_64_and, ashrdi3_cconly_64_and, ashrdi3_64_and,
        <shift>si3_and, ashrsi3_cc_and, ashrsi3_cconly_and, ashrsi3_and,
        rotl<mode>3_and, setmem_long_and): New insns.
        (<shift>di3_31, <shift>di3_64, ashrdi3_cc_31, ashrdi3_cconly_31,
        ashrdi3_31, ashrdi3_cc_64, ashrdi3_cconly_64, ashrdi3_64,
        <shift>si3, ashrsi3_cc, ashrsi3_cconly, ashrsi3, rotl<mode>3,
        <shift>di3, ashrdi3): Use shift_count_or_setmem_operand instead
        of shift_count_operand.
        (setmem_long): Use shift_count_or_setmem_operand instead of
        setmem_operand.

2005-12-08  Andreas Krebbel  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
            Jakub Jelinek  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        PR target/25268
        * gcc.c-torture/compile/20051207-1.c: New test.



Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile/20051207-1.c
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/config/s390/predicates.md
    trunk/gcc/config/s390/s390-protos.h
    trunk/gcc/config/s390/s390.c
    trunk/gcc/config/s390/s390.md
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25268

Reply via email to