I am almost convinced I had tried that already but apparently not.
This seems to have fixed my problem, thank you :-)
Jc
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 01/07/2010 12:58 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I've gone to using unspec and I think I
On 01/07/2010 12:58 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
Dear all,
I've gone to using unspec and I think I know why I have a problem. It
seems that actually, the problem lies with the fact that these
instructions are touching an internal register and how I am handling
that register.
Since I don't
Dear all,
I've gone to using unspec and I think I know why I have a problem. It
seems that actually, the problem lies with the fact that these
instructions are touching an internal register and how I am handling
that register.
Since I don't want the register allocator to use that register, I put
EPILOGUE_USES does not seem to work, the code still gets optimized out.
However, unspec_volatile works but then, as you have said, the
compiler doesn't optimize out things that it then could.
I have for example an instruction to set this special register.
Theoretically, if we had :
set (x);
set
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08:02AM -0500, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
> You are correct. So I should be changing things in the adjust_cost
> function instead.
>
> I was also wondering, these instructions modify an internal register
> that has been set as a fixed register. However, the compiler o
You are correct. So I should be changing things in the adjust_cost
function instead.
I was also wondering, these instructions modify an internal register
that has been set as a fixed register. However, the compiler optimizes
them out when the accumulator is not retrieved for a calculation. How
can
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 05:52:50PM -0500, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
> I thought of that but then how do I add the cost ? I also have another
> problem: there is a second instruction that would have the exact same
> signature if I use an unspec.
>
> Is there a solution for that and how do I han
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 04:46:59PM -0500, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
>> My current solution:
>>
>> - Define a new rtl in rtl.def
>
> Just use an unspec or unspec_volatile. You don't need a new RTL
> operation.
I thought of that but t
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 04:46:59PM -0500, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
> My current solution:
>
> - Define a new rtl in rtl.def
Just use an unspec or unspec_volatile. You don't need a new RTL
operation.
> - Add the new rtl in the MD file and the generated assembly instruction
>
> However, the
