This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Another unrelated SSE patch


Hi
This macro is defined in the David's patch.  It seems to make sense
to avoid gcc from using TImodes for normal computations.  Note that
macro also defines MAX_INTEGER_COMPUTATION_OK, that is needed to allow
RTX expressions for TImodes:

/* Value should be nonzero if EXP is okay for MAX_INTEGER_COMPUTATION_MODE */
#define MAX_INTEGER_COMPUTATION_OK(exp) \
  (TARGET_SSE && \
      (TREE_CODE (exp) == NOP_EXPR || TREE_CODE (exp) == RTL_EXPR)) 

Can someone please contribute the relevant bits in expr.c?

Honza

Wed Feb 21 21:11:41 CET 2001  Jan Hubicka  <jh@suse.cz>

	* i386.h (MAX_INTEGER_COMPUTATION_MODE): Define.

Index: i386.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/egcs/gcc/config/i386/i386.h,v
retrieving revision 1.156
diff -c -3 -p -r1.156 i386.h
*** i386.h	2001/02/19 15:47:30	1.156
--- i386.h	2001/02/21 20:11:25
*************** extern int ix86_arch;
*** 565,570 ****
--- 565,578 ----
   ((MODE) == XFmode || (MODE) == TFmode || ((MODE) == TImode) \
    || (MODE) == V4SFmode	|| (MODE) == V4SImode)
  
+ /* Define this to the largest integer machine mode which can be used
+    for operations other than load, store and copy operations.
+ 
+    You need only define this macro if the target holds values larger
+    than `word_mode' in general purpose registers.  Most targets
+    should not define this macro.  */
+ #define MAX_INTEGER_COMPUTATION_MODE DImode
+ 
  /* The published ABIs say that doubles should be aligned on word
     boundaries, so lower the aligment for structure fields unless
     -malign-double is set.  */


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