This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH, rs6000 (alpha?) long const take 2
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>, trix at redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 00:34:09 -0800
- Subject: Re: PATCH, rs6000 (alpha?) long const take 2
- References: <3C2E36AF.9617D83C@redhat.com> <20011229161316.A27391@redhat.com> <3C2E84BF.42C63D38@redhat.com> <20011229193035.A29404@redhat.com> <3C2EA94D.801FCA14@redhat.com> <20011229230113.A29623@redhat.com> <3C322749.6B1F29EB@redhat.com> <20020101134514.A4366@redhat.com> <jm3d1o78wk.fsf@geoffk.org> <200201030426.XAA07260@makai.watson.ibm.com>
On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 11:26:12PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Do we want to change rs6000_emit_set_long_const to use get_rtx_IOR
> instead of gen_rtx_PLUS?
>
> Also, if explicitly allocting r0 was a problem, r12 should have
> been used instead. Adding extra shifts was wrong on a number of levels.
I think changing rs6000_emit_set_long_const so that it always
works is the right thing. If you want to choose another register,
that's fine.
That said, IOR clearly works better than PLUS because of the r0 issue.
r~