This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, SH4] Fix PR58475 insn swapb does not satisfy its constraints
- From: Kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>
- To: christian dot bruel at st dot com
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 09:23:34 +0900 (JST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, SH4] Fix PR58475 insn swapb does not satisfy its constraints
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <523B03A0 dot 5080005 at st dot com> <20130920 dot 084203 dot 354508583 dot kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>
> Christian Bruel <email@example.com> wrote:
>> (define_insn "*mov<mode>_reg_reg"
>> - [(set (match_operand:QIHI 0 "arith_reg_dest" "=r,m,*z")
>> - (match_operand:QIHI 1 "register_operand" "r,*z,m"))]
>> - "TARGET_SH1 && !t_reg_operand (operands, VOIDmode)"
>> + [(set (match_operand:QIHI 0 "general_movdst_operand" "=r,m,*z")
>> + (match_operand:QIHI 1 "general_movsrc_operand" "r,*z,m"))]
>> + "TARGET_SH1 && !t_reg_operand (operands, VOIDmode)
>> + && arith_reg_dest (operands, <MODE>mode)
>> + && register_operand (operands, <MODE>mode)"
> I thought that predicates explicitly allowing mem only when reload
> in progress are defensive because I guess there is no guarantee
> that the condition part of the insn will be never used in spilling.
> Re-factoring suggested by Oleg and Rechard would be the right thing
> to do, though it might be a bit invasive for 4.8.
Ugh, this should be for
Re: [PATCH, committed] SH: Fix PR58314 (unsatisfied constraints)
Sorry for wrong reply.