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] [POWERPC] Fix PR44419

From: Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797 <edmar at freescale dot com>
To: Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 16:21:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix PR44419
References: <4C0966E4.8080609@freescale.com> <1275685976.2653.24.camel@otta>

Peter Bergner wrote:

On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 15:49 -0500, Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797 wrote:
; These modes do not fit in integer registers in 32-bit mode. -(define_mode_iterator DIFD [DI DF DD]) +; but on e500v2, the gpr are 64 bit registers +(define_mode_iterator DIFD [DI (DF "!TARGET_E500_DOUBLE") DD])
DDmode needs to be handled similarly to DFmode, so this should
probably look like:
(define_mode_iterator DIFD
  [DI
   (DF "!TARGET_E500_DOUBLE")
   (DD "!TARGET_E500_DOUBLE")])
I think the above is what you mentioned you were going to test when
we last talked offline.
Peter

I found through testing that that is not the case. The e500v2 behaves like the rest of powerpc architectures in regards of DD mode. It is only DF mode that the behavior is different.

Edmar

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix PR44419
  - From: Peter Bergner

References:
- [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix PR44419
  - From: Edmar Wienskoski-RA8797
- Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix PR44419
  - From: Peter Bergner

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