On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:52:56AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
> Yes that's better. I've adjusted the testcase as you proposed and
> have tested it on x86_64, ppc, and s390x with -m32(-m31) and -m64.
As I said earlier, talking just about the testcase, leaving review to Jason.
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr33661.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> +/* PR c++/33661 */
> +
> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> +/* { dg-options "-O1" } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "reg: %r8" { target { { x86_64*-*-* i?86-*-*
> } && lp64 } } } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "reg: %ecx" { target { { x86_64*-*-* i?86-*-*
> } && ia32 } } } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "reg: 8" { target { powerpc*-*-* } } } } */
Looks mostly good, just wonder about the powerpc scan-assembler.
Shouldn't that be "reg: (%r)?8" instead? I think powerpc has -mregnames
option, dunno if some target doesn't even use it by default.
Jakub
