This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Different addressing modes for loads and stores?
- From: "Ulrich Weigand" <Ulrich dot Weigand at de dot ibm dot com>
- To: fcook at hotmail dot com
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:20:05 +0200
- Subject: Re: Different addressing modes for loads and stores?
- Sensitivity:
Fred Cook wrote:
>My loads support base+offset and base+register addressing while stores
>only have base+offset addressing. My GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS macro
>accepts both addressing modes. Now the question is how to prevent that
>the base+register mode is used for stores. For that changed the movsi
>pattern to:
[snip]
>and I used the EXTRA_CONSTRAINT macro to accept only base+offset
>if the letter argument is 'S'. However, this does not lead to what
>I wanted to achieve. "=r,Sm" or "=r,mS" also does not work.
We've had similar problems on s390 with different addressing modes.
To fix this, I've added the EXTRA_MEMORY_CONSTRAINT feature; this
should do what you want ...
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards
Ulrich Weigand
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
Linux for S/390 Design & Development
IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH, Schoenaicher Str. 220, 71032 Boeblingen
Phone: +49-7031/16-3727 --- Email: Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com