This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: REG_OK_STRICT and EXTRA_CONSTRAINT
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- To: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 07:25:38 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: REG_OK_STRICT and EXTRA_CONSTRAINT
- References: <44ED61CB.4050600@lu.unisi.ch>
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