This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] [tree-ssa] Fix handling of BIT_FIELD_REFs andVECTOR_TYPEs
- From: "Paolo Bonzini" <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- To: <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 19:31:39 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC] [tree-ssa] Fix handling of BIT_FIELD_REFs andVECTOR_TYPEs
I'm really sorry for messing up the lists with two copies of this message, one
of which partly edited. Why are the Reply and Reply To All buttons so darn
> You had the right bits in your patch, already:
Ok, I will put them in the lowering patch when I get to submit it for
> Yes. But to trigger the abort() all you need is something along the
> lines of
> if (TREE_CODE (stmt) == MODIFY_EXPR
> && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (stmt, 0)) == BIT_FIELD_REF
> && is_gimple_reg (TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (stmt, 0), 0)))
Yes. I'll add that to verify_stmts.
> The change to set_is_used is OK. I think that the change to
> get_expr_operands shouldn't be necessary.
I'll try it on my tree, in the meanwhile I'll add the check above and
resubmit an updated patch tomorrow.