On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 03:26:45PM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > On 13-04-22 12:35 AM, Alan Modra wrote: > >On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 05:16:43PM -0400, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > >> I don't understand what this check means and what comments ??? means too. > >A lo_sum mem is only valid if you know it won't be offset (or that > >offsetting will never cross a 64k+32k boundary). If the access is > >smaller than a word then the load or store can be done in one insn. > >No offset required. If the access is a DFmode *and* you are loading > >or storing a floating point reg, then the access is also done in one > >insn. The ??? comment is referring to the fact that you don't know > >for sure that the DFmode is in a floating point reg. It usually is, > >but may be in two general purpose regs. Which then need an offset to > >load/store the second reg. > > > Alan, thanks for the explanation. I'll search for another solution.
I'm suspecting secondary_reload needs more tuning for TF/TD modes. -- Michael Meissner, IBM IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460, USA email: meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797
