Hi Jeff,
> IIRC you're not supposed to have (subreg (mem)) expressions at this point.
>
> Any (subreg (mem)) at this point can be trivially turned into a simple
> memory load.
>
The issue is that the mode_dependent_address_p hook returns true, thus the
simplify_subreg() will not simplify the su
On 10/11/2016 08:48 AM, Claudiu Zissulescu wrote:
Hi,
Out of the expand I get the following pattern:
(set (reg:SI 203)
(subreg:SI (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 147 virtual-stack-vars)
(const_int -320 [0xfec0])) [4 buf1.state+0 S8
A32]) 4))
which it look
Sorry for the noise, I've remember I had a similar issue in the past.
Thanks,
Claudiu
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Claudiu Zissulescu
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Out of the expand I get the following pattern:
>
> (set (reg:SI 203)
> (subreg:SI (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 147 virtual-stack-var
Hi,
Out of the expand I get the following pattern:
(set (reg:SI 203)
(subreg:SI (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 147 virtual-stack-vars)
(const_int -320 [0xfec0])) [4 buf1.state+0 S8
A32]) 4))
which it looks too complex to be handled by the VREGS pass. I.e.,