2009/2/27 daniel tian <daniel.xnt...@gmail.com>:
> 2009/2/27 Dave Korn <dave.korn.cyg...@googlemail.com>:
>> daniel tian wrote:
>>
>>> That seems to solving a address mode problem. My problem is that while
>>> loading a large immediate data or SYMBOL_REF, the destination is a
>>> specified general register (register 0:R0). So I don't how to let the
>>> define_expand "movsi" pattern to generate destination register in R0.
>>
>> Well, the RTL that you emit in your define_expand has to match an insn
>> pattern in the end, so you could make an insn for it that uses a predicate
>> and
>> matching constraint to enforce only accepting r0. If you use a predicate
>> that
>> only accepts r0 you'll get better codegen than if you use a predicate that
>> accepts general regs and use an r0-only constraint to instruct reload to
>> place
>> the operand in r0.
>
> Well, I have already done this. There is insn pattern that the
> predicate limits the operand in R0. But if in define_expand "movsi" do
> not put the register in R0, the compiler will crashed because of the
> unrecognized RTL(load big immediate or Symbol). Like the below:
> (define_insn "load_imm_big"
> [(set (match_operand:SI 0 "zero_register_operand" "=r")
> (match_operand:SI 1 "rice_imm32_operand" "i"))
> (clobber (reg:SI 0))]
> "TARGET_RICE"
> {
> return rice_output_move (operands, SImode);
> }
> )
>
> PS:rice_output_move is function to output assemble code.
>
> Thanks.
>
Hello, Dave, Rennecke :
I defined the PREFERRED_RELOAD_CLASS macro, but this cc1 doesn't
go through it.
#define PREFERRED_RELOAD_CLASS(X, CLASS)
rice_preferred_reload_class(X, CLASS)
And rice_preferred_reload_class(X, CLASS) is:
enum reg_class rice_preferred_reload_class (rtx x, enum reg_class class)
{
printf("Come to rice_preferred_reload_class! \n");
if((GET_CODE(x) == SYMBOL_REF) ||
(GET_CODE(x) == LABEL_REF) ||
(GET_CODE(x) == CONST) ||
((GET_CODE(x) == CONST_INT) && (!Bit10_constant_operand(x,
GET_MODE(x)))))
{
return R0_REG;
}
return class;
}
I run the cc1 file with command "./cc1 test_reload.c -Os". But
the gcc never goes through this function. Did I missed something?
Thank you very much.
