Jeff Law wrote:
Richard Henderson wrote:
Michael Eager wrote:
Another possibility is illegal rtl sharing.
If you mean that an rtx would be pointed to by two different
insn's, how would that happen? (Excluding someone mucking
things up deliberately or accidentally.)
Generally this sort of m
Richard Henderson wrote:
Michael Eager wrote:
Another possibility is illegal rtl sharing.
If you mean that an rtx would be pointed to by two different
insn's, how would that happen? (Excluding someone mucking
things up deliberately or accidentally.)
Generally this sort of mistake happens in
Michael Eager wrote:
Another possibility is illegal rtl sharing.
If you mean that an rtx would be pointed to by two different
insn's, how would that happen? (Excluding someone mucking
things up deliberately or accidentally.)
Generally this sort of mistake happens in the backend somewhere.
E.
Richard Henderson wrote:
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm running into a situation where reload is replacing
a pseudo-register in an insn with a memory reference.
The problem is that this is happening in a memory ref.
The initial pattern is something like
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm running into a situation where reload is replacing
a pseudo-register in an insn with a memory reference.
The problem is that this is happening in a memory ref.
The initial pattern is something like
(set (reg/v:SI 1) (mem/s:
Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The insn was previously recognized before the following
> code at the end of reload replaces the pseudo-reg with the reg-equivalent:
>
> 1107 /* Now eliminate all pseudo regs by modifying them into
> 1108 their equivalent memory references.
> 1109
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm running into a situation where reload is replacing
a pseudo-register in an insn with a memory reference.
The problem is that this is happening in a memory ref.
The initial pattern is something like
(set (reg/v:SI 1) (mem/s:
Michael Eager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm running into a situation where reload is replacing
> a pseudo-register in an insn with a memory reference.
> The problem is that this is happening in a memory ref.
>
> The initial pattern is something like
>
> (set (reg/v:SI 1) (mem/s:SI (plus:SI
>
Hi --
I'm running into a situation where reload is replacing
a pseudo-register in an insn with a memory reference.
The problem is that this is happening in a memory ref.
The initial pattern is something like
(set (reg/v:SI 1) (mem/s:SI (plus:SI
(reg/f:SI 30)
(const_int 4)) ))
A
