Here is the patch taking all the proposals into account.
Successfully bootstrapped on x86-64.
commit 7ad6b73421e3599628bf52fb175f004ce13f2ae9 (HEAD -> master)
Author: Vladimir N. Makarov
Date: Tue Mar 9 10:57:21 2021 -0500
[PR99454] LRA: Process separately 'g' and digital constraints >
On 2021-03-09 9:53 a.m., Martin Liška wrote:
On 3/9/21 3:12 PM, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches wrote:
The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64,
ppc64le, and arm64. Unfortunately, I did not manage to reduce the
test (whose size is 5MB).
I've just reduced test-case from
On 3/9/21 3:12 PM, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches wrote:
The patch was successfully bootstrapped and tested on x86-64, ppc64le, and
arm64. Unfortunately, I did not manage to reduce the test (whose size is 5MB).
I've just reduced test-case from it:
$ cat a.c
struct skb_shared_info {
short
On 2021-03-09 9:26 a.m., Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:12:36AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
wrote:
diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c
index 76e3ff7efe6..feff766c590 100644
--- a/gcc/lra-constraints.c
+++ b/gcc/lra-constraints.c
@@ -3452,6 +
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 03:26:12PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:12:36AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c
> > index 76e3ff7efe6..feff766c590 100644
> > --- a/gcc/lra-constraint
On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:12:36AM -0500, Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/lra-constraints.c b/gcc/lra-constraints.c
> index 76e3ff7efe6..feff766c590 100644
> --- a/gcc/lra-constraints.c
> +++ b/gcc/lra-constraints.c
> @@ -3452,6 +3452,10 @@ process_address_1 (int nop, bo
