On Tue, 9 Dec 2008, Vladimir Makarov wrote: > Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > Vladimir, have you had chance to look at supporting > > LOAD_EXTEND_OP (implicit sign-extension) in IRA? > > <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-10/msg00458.html> > > I'm guessing no, but hope it's not forgotten. > It seems I missed that, sorry. I'll look at the problem on this week. > > May be a patch I committed today solves the problem (it permits to work IRA > without defining IRA_COVER_CLASSES). I'll check it later.
For the record, the issue there, isn't really how to define IRA_COVER_CLASSES, (so I guess "no"), it's whether the transformations combine does, that uses LOAD_EXTEND_OP (i.e. whether reads from memory are implicitly extended), are handled by the register allocator. brgds, H-P
