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: [0/8] Add optabs alternatives for insv, extv and extzv


On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Richard Sandiford
<rdsandiford@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramrad01@arm.com> writes:
>>> Tested on x86_64-linux-gnu, powerpc64-linux-gnu and mipsisa64-elf.
>>> Also tested by making sure that there were no changes in assembly
>>> output for a set of gcc .ii files.  On the other hand, the -march=octeon
>>> output for a set of mips64-linux-gnu gcc .ii files showed the optimisation
>>> kicking in as hoped.
>>
>> This sequence of patches caused a regression in
>> gcc.target/arm/volatile-bitfields-1.c . I haven't reviewed the patch
>> stack in great detail yet, but it looks like this sequence of patches
>> doesn't take the ARM volatile bitfields into account. (193600 is fine,
>> 193606 is not).
>
> Looks like I was wrong to drop the conditions from patch 5.
> Please could you try the attached?

Fixes volatile-bitfields-1.c but appears to break volatile-bitfields-4.c :( .

Ramana

>
> Richard
>
>
> gcc/
>         * expmed.c (adjust_bit_field_mem_for_reg): Add handling of volatile
>         bitfields.
>
> Index: gcc/expmed.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/expmed.c        2012-11-27 19:09:18.000000000 +0000
> +++ gcc/expmed.c        2012-11-27 19:09:33.314634741 +0000
> @@ -372,6 +372,15 @@ adjust_bit_field_mem_for_reg (enum extra
>                                 bitregion_end, MEM_ALIGN (op0),
>                                 MEM_VOLATILE_P (op0));
>    enum machine_mode best_mode;
> +  if (MEM_VOLATILE_P (op0) && flag_strict_volatile_bitfields > 0)
> +    {
> +      while (iter.next_mode (&best_mode))
> +       if (GET_MODE_SIZE (best_mode) == MEM_SIZE (op0))
> +         return narrow_bit_field_mem (op0, best_mode, bitsize, bitnum,
> +                                      new_bitnum);
> +      return NULL_RTX;
> +    }
> +
>    if (iter.next_mode (&best_mode))
>      {
>        /* We can use a memory in BEST_MODE.  See whether this is true for


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