On Thu, 21 Jul 2011, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 07/21/2011 08:09 AM, Richard Guenther wrote: > > + /* It's not interesting to widen anything smaller than SImode. */ > > + if (TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (rhs1)) < GET_MODE_PRECISION (SImode) > > + || (!TYPE_UNSIGNED (TREE_TYPE (rhs1)) > > + && TYPE_PRECISION (TREE_TYPE (rhs1)) == GET_MODE_PRECISION (SImode))) > > + return false; > > Hard-coding SImode? Really? You might as well hard-code 32. At least > that's "more correct" when someone does have BITS_PER_UNIT != 8.
I'd guess this is intended to match the hardcoding of SImode in optabs.c:expand_float - both of which should maybe use the same target hook (that defaults to using SImode) rather than hardcoding SImode. (Strictly, in the model that the very existence of SImode should be target-dependent, the default hook definition would go in a file in config/ that's shared by all targets with BITS_PER_UNIT == 8 and the classic set of machine modes, rather than in targhooks.c, but I don't think we need to worry about that for now.) -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
