On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:46 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I have looked at example in rs6000.c, the only target that uses >>> SUBREG_PROMOTED_UNSIGNED_P. Looking at other sources, S_P_U_P is used >>> in conjunction with SUBREG_PROMOTED_VAR. It looks to me that using the >>> combination should be OK to determine if subreg is correct. >> >> Attached patch adds paradoxical subreg handling. Patch is diffed vs. >> current mainline. >> >> H.J., does it work for x32 branch? Does it make any difference? >> >> (BTW: You will need [1] from the trunk). >> >> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01693.html >> > > I will give it a try. >
No regressions on x32. Thanks. -- H.J.
