On Thu, 3 Aug 2023, YunQiang Su wrote:
> PR #104914
Please don't cc me on MIPS matters, I have told you I have withdrawn my
interest in this architecture on the GCC side. Thank you.
Maciej
>
> Like I mentioned in the other thread, I think things went wrong when
> we generated the subreg in this sign_extend. The operation should
> have been a truncate of (reg/v:DI 200) followed by a sign extension
> of the result.
>
Sorry for my misunderstanding.
So you mean that in the RTL, for th
YunQiang Su writes:
> PR #104914
>
> On TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION_MODES_P (DImode, SImode)) == true platforms,
> zero_extract (SI, SI) can be sign-extended. So, if a zero_extract (DI,
> DI) following with an sign_extend(SI, DI) can be merged to a single
> zero_extract (SI, SI).
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
YunQiang Su 于2023年8月3日周四 11:18写道：
>
> PR #104914
>
> On TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION_MODES_P (DImode, SImode)) == true platforms,
> zero_extract (SI, SI) can be sign-extended. So, if a zero_extract (DI,
> DI) following with an sign_extend(SI, DI) can be merged to a single
> zero_extract (SI, SI).
>
The
PR #104914
On TRULY_NOOP_TRUNCATION_MODES_P (DImode, SImode)) == true platforms,
zero_extract (SI, SI) can be sign-extended. So, if a zero_extract (DI,
DI) following with an sign_extend(SI, DI) can be merged to a single
zero_extract (SI, SI).
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR: 104914.
* combine.
