This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [G]CSE of extended asm statements
- To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at cygnus dot co dot uk>
- Subject: Re: [G]CSE of extended asm statements
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: 01 Sep 2000 14:46:31 -0300
- Cc: Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0009010923300.24465-100000@balti.cygnus.co.uk>
On Sep 1, 2000, Bernd Schmidt <bernds@cygnus.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>> *However* there isn't necessarily a single mode that will be
>> correct for an ASM_OPERANDS expression -- it might have multiple
>> outputs with different modes for example and since the ASM_OPERANDS
>> is shared, we can't have different copies of it with different modes.
> [...]
>> Thoughts?
> Why exactly do we share ASM_OPERANDS? (I.e. why can't we just change
> that convention?)
We don't. expand_asm_operands create a separate ASM_OPERANDS for each
output operand. It's just the input and input constraint vectors that
are shared. My patch works correctly even if there are multiple
output operands.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me