Hi, This patch references the wrong bug. It should reference 71677 and not 71667 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71677
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71667 Thanks, Alan. As we discussed in the patch review, there were some issues with using %Y for the ISA 3.0 instructions LXSD and STXSD. I have rewritten the patch so that we have a new memory constraint (%wY) that explicitly targets those instructions. I went back to the mov{DF,DD} patterns and changed their use of %o to %wY. I removed the test that was generated from the XalanNamespacesStack.cpp source that showed up the problem. I have bootstrapped this on a little endian power8 system and there were no regressions in the test suite. I also built Spec 2006 for power9 with this compiler, and the xalancbmk benchmark now builds. I will kick off a big endian build on a power7 system. Assuming there are no regressions in power7, are these patches ok to install in the trunk, and backport to GCC 6.2 after a burn-in period? 2016-06-28 Michael Meissner <meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> PR target/71667 * config/rs6000/constraints.md (wY constraint): New constraint to match the requirements for the LXSD and STXSD instructions. * config/rs6000/predicates.md (offsettable_mem_14bit_operand): New predicate to match the requirements for the LXSD and STXSD instructions. * config/rs6000/rs6000.md (mov<mode>_hardfloat32, FMOVE64 case): Use constaint wY for LXSD/STXSD instructions instead of 'o' or 'Y' to make sure that the bottom 2 bits of offset are 0, the address form is offsettable, and no updating is done in the address mode. (mov<mode>_hardfloat64, FMOVE64 case): Likewise. (movdi_internal32): Likewise (movdi_internal64): Likewise. -- Michael Meissner, IBM IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460-6245, USA email: meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797
