On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Richard Guenther
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> TARGET_MEM_REF only works on ptr_mode. This patch allows 32bit
>>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>> in x32 mode. OK for trunk?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you perhaps have a testcase to help in analyzing the problem?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49780
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think that tree-ssa-address/addr_for_mem_ref is correct when
>>>>> REALLY_EXPAND is false. It constructs RTX "template" in pointer_mode,
>>>>> which is not necessary valid and is rejected from
>>>>> ix86_validate_address_p. When really expanding the expression, we have
>>>>> a conversion at the end:
>>>>>
>>>>> gen_addr_rtx (pointer_mode, sym, bse, idx, st, off, &address, NULL,
>>>>> NULL);
>>>>> if (pointer_mode != address_mode)
>>>>> address = convert_memory_address (address_mode, address);
>>>>> return address;
>>>>>
>>>>> This is in fact your r175912 change in the fix for PR47383 - you need
>>>>> to do something with template as well...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since TARGET_MEM_REF only works on ptr_mode, I don't think
>>>> we can change template. We just need to accept TARGET_MEM_REF
>>>> in ptr_mode and fix it up later.
>>>
>>> No, a template is used to get some insight into the supported address
>>> structure. If there is a mismatch, this approach fails, we can as well
>>> give the compiler whatever fake template we want.
I have investigated other Pmode != ptr_mode targets, and none of them
check the mode of a register in TARGET_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS_P (or
equivalent GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS). All it matters is only if there
is a register and regno of the register.
Attached patch simply removes these two checks, as it seems they are
not needed. This also follows how other Pmode != ptr_mode targets.
2011-07-19 Uros Bizjak <[email protected]>
PR target/49780
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_legitimate_address_p): Remove checks that
base and index registers are in Pmode.
Patch was bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
{,-m32}. Can you please re-test it on x32?
BTW: I still think that template should return the same address
structure as expansion, but this won't crash the compiler anymore.
Uros.
Index: config/i386/i386.c
===================================================================
--- config/i386/i386.c (revision 176433)
+++ config/i386/i386.c (working copy)
@@ -11653,10 +11653,6 @@ ix86_legitimate_address_p (enum machine_
/* Base is not a register. */
return false;
- if (GET_MODE (base) != Pmode)
- /* Base is not in Pmode. */
- return false;
-
if ((strict && ! REG_OK_FOR_BASE_STRICT_P (reg))
|| (! strict && ! REG_OK_FOR_BASE_NONSTRICT_P (reg)))
/* Base is not valid. */
@@ -11682,10 +11678,6 @@ ix86_legitimate_address_p (enum machine_
/* Index is not a register. */
return false;
- if (GET_MODE (index) != Pmode)
- /* Index is not in Pmode. */
- return false;
-
if ((strict && ! REG_OK_FOR_INDEX_STRICT_P (reg))
|| (! strict && ! REG_OK_FOR_INDEX_NONSTRICT_P (reg)))
/* Index is not valid. */
