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: fixed_scalar_and_varying_struct_p and varies_p


On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Richard Sandiford
<richard.sandiford@linaro.org> wrote:
> Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
>>>> I'd say open a missed optimization bug with the testcase and go ahead
>>>> with both patches. ?Let's see if Eric has some comments first though.
>>>
>>> None, but the m32c maintainer may have some.
>>>
>>> DJ, do you happen to know the rationale for the use of the MEM_SCALAR_P and
>>> MEM_IN_STRUCT_P flags in m32c_immd_dbl_mov? ?What condition do these tests try
>>> to model exactly?
>>
>> Ping? ?I'm now running into wrong-code issues because of store_field setting
>> MEM_IN_STRUCT_P of !MEM_SCALAR_P ... that's not a conservative
>> guesstimate, and initial attribute finding already has discovered everything
>> possible. ?Thus, I'm testing but was remembering your patch removing
>> all traces of MEM_IN_STRUCT_P/MEM_SCALAR_P which would be
>> of course even better.
>
> Yeah, sorry, I was waiting (probably too long) to see if DJ had any comments.
>
>> Given DJs lack of response I'd say he doesn't know or does not have any
>> objection.
>
> OK. ?I'm certainly happy to apply the earlier patches tonight if that's
> still all right with you.

Fine with me.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Richard


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