This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [cft] subreg validation round 2

From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>,Bob Wilson <bwilson at tensilica dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:23:08 +1030
Subject: Re: [cft] subreg validation round 2
References: <20041117184009.GA12257@redhat.com> <419BA411.5090801@tensilica.com> <20041117194553.GA12418@redhat.com>

On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:45:53AM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:18:41AM -0800, Bob Wilson wrote:
> > If so, should I change FUNCTION_ARG code to avoid 
> > returning a BLKmode reg?  Should I wrap the REG in a PARALLEL?
> 
> Presumably you didn't just return the SImode reg in the first place
> because you want the three bytes in the high part of the register?
> Then, yes, a PARALLEL should do.

Or define a suitable BLOCK_REG_PADDING.  At least, that used to work..

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [cft] subreg validation round 2
  - From: Bob Wilson

References:
- [cft] subreg validation round 2
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [cft] subreg validation round 2
  - From: Bob Wilson
- Re: [cft] subreg validation round 2
  - From: Richard Henderson

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