This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Deep CSE bug!
- From: "Dave Korn" <dk at artimi dot com>
- To: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 16:39:28 +0100
- Subject: RE: Deep CSE bug!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-owner On Behalf Of Dave Korn
> Sent: 17 June 2004 15:04
> > So I guess my question for anyone who's on first-name terms
> > with the CSE machinery is, given this insn
> >
> > (insn 33 32 37 0 0x1002f510 (set (subreg:SI (reg:DI 80) 4)
> > (reg/v:SI 75)) 22 {movsi} (nil)
> > (expr_list:REG_EQUAL (const_double -1 [0xffffffff] 0
> > [0x0] 0 [0x0] 0 [0x0] 0 [0x0] 0 [0x0])
> > (nil)))
> >
> > is it valid that src_eqv is
> >
> > (const_double -1 [0xffffffff] 0 [0x0] 0 [0x0] 0 [0x0] 0
> [0x0] 0 [0x0])
>
> ...or I suppose I should wonder if the REG_EQUAL note is a
> valid thing to
> attach to the SImode subreg rather than the DImode reg?
Hmm. I see that Jie Zhang had pretty much this exact same problem over a
year ago, but I can't find any followups to this post:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-04/msg01397.html
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....