On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 08:35:12PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > The Yr constraint contrary to what has been said when it has been submitted
>> > actually is always NO_R
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 08:35:12PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > The Yr constraint contrary to what has been said when it has been submitted
> > actually is always NO_REX_SSE_REGS or NO_REGS, never ALL_SSE_REGS, so
> > the RA rest
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> The Yr constraint contrary to what has been said when it has been submitted
> actually is always NO_REX_SSE_REGS or NO_REGS, never ALL_SSE_REGS, so
> the RA restriction to only the first 8 regs is done no matter what we tune
> for.
>
Hi!
The Yr constraint contrary to what has been said when it has been submitted
actually is always NO_REX_SSE_REGS or NO_REGS, never ALL_SSE_REGS, so
the RA restriction to only the first 8 regs is done no matter what we tune
for.
This is because we test X86_TUNE_AVOID_4BYTE_PREFIXES, which is an
