This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH 3/4, MIPS] Move clear_upper32* patterns to the and patterns

From: Adam Nemet <anemet at caviumnetworks dot com>
To: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:28:51 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4, MIPS] Move clear_upper32* patterns to the and patterns
References: <19057.62127.907350.916479@ropi.home> <o7prbi9d60.fsf@ropi.home> <873a8d99ui.fsf@firetop.home>

Richard Sandiford writes:
> Sorry to be a pain, but I'd rather keep them where they are.
> As the comment says, these are really zero-extend operations
> in all but name; they just have an unusual pattern because of
> the T_N_T thing.
> 
> I'll reconsider if we don't end up going in the direction suggested
> in the other replies.

JTBS, as I pointed out in the patch 4 thread, we still need to explicitly
exclude 0xffff_ffff in the predicate.  Hence this question is still open, I
believe.  Do we want an extra check there or just rely on the order in which
case these patterns need to move up?

Adam

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 3/4, MIPS] Move clear_upper32* patterns to the and patterns
  - From: Richard Henderson

References:
- [PATCH 0/4 MIPS, middle-end] Generate ext when anding with low-order bitmask
  - From: Adam Nemet
- [PATCH 3/4, MIPS] Move clear_upper32* patterns to the and patterns
  - From: Adam Nemet
- Re: [PATCH 3/4, MIPS] Move clear_upper32* patterns to the and patterns
  - From: Richard Sandiford

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