This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: combination of read/write and earlyclobber constraint modifier
- From: Christophe Lyon <christophe dot lyon at linaro dot org>
- To: Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries at mentor dot com>
- Cc: Marcus Shawcroft <marcus dot shawcroft at gmail dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 11:31:46 +0200
- Subject: Re: combination of read/write and earlyclobber constraint modifier
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <53B30B96 dot 2000603 at mentor dot com> <53B31041 dot 8060608 at redhat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1407012155000 dot 2640 at laptop-mg dot saclay dot inria dot fr> <53B32D3A dot 1030700 at mentor dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1407020800530 dot 2059 at laptop-mg dot saclay dot inria dot fr> <53B3BC7E dot 3040709 at mentor dot com> <CAFqB+PykGc-8Gstn-c3sPim9FxLpXj9DxmAcwBxLM=A05j=Lvg at mail dot gmail dot com> <53B51590 dot 7030903 at mentor dot com> <CAKdteObXyyAOap0wAWpiOce65fHCn=WUWWxb2FUxYdkE0_FADQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 7 July 2014 11:29, Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 3 July 2014 10:34, Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com> wrote:
>> On 03-07-14 10:20, Marcus Shawcroft wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2 July 2014 09:02, Tom de Vries <Tom_deVries@mentor.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 02-07-14 08:23, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In the first example you gave, looking at the pattern (no match_dup,
>>>>> setting the
>>>>> full register), it seems that it may have wanted "=&" instead of "+&".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [ move discussion from gcc ml to gcc-patches ml ]
>>>>
>>>> Marcus,
>>>>
>>>> The +& constraint on operand 0 of vec_unpack_trunc_<mode> seems wrong,
>>>> since
>>>> the template does not use the operand as input.
>>>>
>>>> This patch fixes that.
>>>>
>>>> OK for trunk if aarch64 build & regtest succeeds ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Your patch looks fine, operand 0 isn't used for input. OK assuming no
>>> regression. Did you find this by inspection or is this the cause of
>>> some bug?
>>>
>>
>> Marcus,
>>
>> I found this by inspection: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-07/msg00007.html
>> .
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Tom
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> This patch causes gcc.target/aarch64/vmlsq_laneq.c to FAIL on
> aarch64_be-none-elf.
>
> Christophe.
... which was fixed by James' commit 212298
Sorry for the noise
Christophe.