On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 02:18:36PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > What does it mean for
> > (set (reg:QI) (const_int -128))
> > for example? This is the canonical form of moving positive 128 into a
> > register as well, of course.
>
> Nothing, since word_register_operation_p returns false on C
> What does it mean for
> (set (reg:QI) (const_int -128))
> for example? This is the canonical form of moving positive 128 into a
> register as well, of course.
Nothing, since word_register_operation_p returns false on CONST_INTs .
> W_R_O needs many more restrictions if it can work at all, bu
Hi Eric,
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:39:51PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> This fixes a wrong code generation on the ARM in very peculiar circumstances
> (
> -O2 -fno-dce -fno-forward-propagate -fno-sched-pressure) present on all
> active
> branches in the form of a missing zero-extension. It
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:39:51PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> This fixes a wrong code generation on the ARM in very peculiar circumstances
> (
> -O2 -fno-dce -fno-forward-propagate -fno-sched-pressure) present on all
> active
> branches in the form of a missing zero-extension. It turns out
This fixes a wrong code generation on the ARM in very peculiar circumstances (
-O2 -fno-dce -fno-forward-propagate -fno-sched-pressure) present on all active
branches in the form of a missing zero-extension. It turns out that not all
parts of the RTL middle-end agree on the assumptions valid on
