This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: new-regalloc vs alpha

To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: new-regalloc vs alpha
From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 14:46:08 -0800
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010130120917.C11529@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.31.0101301727520.12323-100000@www.cgsoftware.com>

On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 05:33:23PM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > 	(set (reg:DI foo) (mem:DI (reg:DI $f10)))
...
> Shouldn't reload fix this for us though?

Yes, it should.  And if it knows what sort of instruction this is,
it _will_ fix it up.  The problem arises only when the insn code
is unknown (step one in the outlined scenario), which means that
it has no operand locations or constraints to work with.

I'm of a mind to step through this scenario with mainline source
and find out why we don't blow up, because it sure looks like we
ought to.

r~

References:
- Re: new-regalloc vs alpha
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: new-regalloc vs alpha
  - From: Daniel Berlin

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]