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: REG_OK_STRICT and EXTRA_CONSTRAINT


On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

> Some ports, notably MMIX, are using different definitions of
> EXTRA_CONSTRAINT depending on REG_OK_STRICT.  This can be a bug, because
> the same instruction may be considered invalid in reload.c and valid by
> recog.c.

When I wrote that code, accounting for REG_OK_STRICT was not a
bug, but TRT.  (I'm about two months behind on mailing list
reading, so I guess things may have changed as things tend to
do.)

> So I would apply this patch to addressing-modes branch but I'd
> appreciate advice: is the patch safe, or is there some case where
> reload.c looks at constraints and reload_in_progress == 0?

My opinion is that regtesting and checking that the same
assembly is emitted before and after the patch would be
sufficient testing...  It's definitely not safe without. ;)

brgds, H-P


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