Re: [PATCH] ext-dce: Fix subreg_lsb is_constant assumption

2025-07-09 Thread Jeff Law
On 7/9/25 8:00 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: Makes me wonder if I should resurrect my aarch64_be RFS. I changed how those systems worked in the system a few years back to make it work better with container based testing rather than direct chroots. I never converted aarch64_be to that setup

Re: [PATCH] ext-dce: Fix subreg_lsb is_constant assumption

2025-07-09 Thread Richard Sandiford
Jeff Law writes: > On 7/4/25 10:21 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: >> ext-dce had: >> >>if (SUBREG_P (dst) && SUBREG_BYTE (dst).is_constant ()) >> { >>bit = subreg_lsb (dst).to_constant (); >>if (bit >= HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) >> bit = HOST_BITS_

Re: [PATCH] ext-dce: Fix subreg_lsb is_constant assumption

2025-07-04 Thread Jeff Law
On 7/4/25 10:21 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote: ext-dce had: if (SUBREG_P (dst) && SUBREG_BYTE (dst).is_constant ()) { bit = subreg_lsb (dst).to_constant (); if (bit >= HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) bit = HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT - 1;

[PATCH] ext-dce: Fix subreg_lsb is_constant assumption

2025-07-04 Thread Richard Sandiford
ext-dce had: if (SUBREG_P (dst) && SUBREG_BYTE (dst).is_constant ()) { bit = subreg_lsb (dst).to_constant (); if (bit >= HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT) bit = HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT - 1; dst = SUBREG_REG (dst); But a constant