Juul Vanderspek wrote:
In order to enable indexed loads, I extended
GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS to also match indexed
addresses, added a memory constraint 'R' to match
nonindexed addresses, and used R for stores in the
'mov' rule (see below).
This may be easier if you do it the other way. I.e. re
I collapsed the macro exactly because I am pretty sure
that this macro is ok (I have extensively verified
that it works), and to keep the
initial message small. I have attached my complete
configuration file this time.
--- Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 08 June 2006 18:54, Juul Vander
On 08 June 2006 18:54, Juul Vanderspek wrote:
> Um, this just is a collapse of some large macro.
> The original compiles into a compiler that refuses to
> reload.
The point I was making was that if you think there's a problem with that
macro, and you've posted to the list to ask if anyone can
Um, this just is a collapse of some large macro.
The original compiles into a compiler that refuses to
reload.
> >
> > #define GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS ... \
> > -- recognizes register, displaced, and indexed --
>
>
> Oh, yes. That's not valid C at all.
>
>
> cheers,
> DaveK
>
On 08 June 2006 17:44, Juul Vanderspek wrote:
> Tracing all this in find_reloads (reload.c), I see a
> call to find_reloads_address, indeed with reload type
> RELOAD_FOR_OUTPUT_ADDRESS, but this function
> immediately discovers that the address is a
> strict_memory_address, and decides to do noth
I would appreciate any help in this reload problem
that I have been struggling with for some time:
I completed a gcc back end port to a processor that
supports both displaced and indexed addressing modes
for load, but only displaced for store. For example:
ld.w Rd Rb imm(load from Rb+imm)
