This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Question about i386.md and 32-bit and 64-bit split and peephole rules
- From: "Kai Tietz" <ktietz70 at googlemail dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Kai dot Tietz at onevision dot com
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 21:43:17 +0200
- Subject: Question about i386.md and 32-bit and 64-bit split and peephole rules
Hi,
As I noticed are some parts in i386.md existing for just for 32-bit,
but will be used in 64-bit, too.
For example:
(define_split
[(set (match_operand:XF 0 "push_operand" "")
(float_extend:XF (match_operand:SF 1 "fp_register_operand" "")))]
""
[(set (reg:SI SP_REG) (plus:SI (reg:SI SP_REG) (match_dup 2)))
(set (mem:XF (reg:SI SP_REG)) (float_extend:XF (match_dup 1)))]
"operands[2] = GEN_INT (TARGET_128BIT_LONG_DOUBLE ? -16 : -12);")
(define_split
[(set (match_operand:XF 0 "push_operand" "")
(float_extend:XF (match_operand:SF 1 "fp_register_operand" "")))]
"TARGET_64BIT"
[(set (reg:DI SP_REG) (plus:DI (reg:DI SP_REG) (match_dup 2)))
(set (mem:DF (reg:DI SP_REG)) (float_extend:XF (match_dup 1)))]
"operands[2] = GEN_INT (TARGET_128BIT_LONG_DOUBLE ? -16 : -12);")
The first section will be used on 32-bit and on 64-bit, the second
just for 64-bit. Isn't this wrong? Should in the first define_split
not explicit said "!TARGET_64BIT"?
There some other places where this happens too, and for the ESP
adjustments there seems to be present just the 32-bit version?.
Thanks in advance for anwser,
Kai
--
| (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste
| (='.'=) Bunny into your signature to help
| (")_(") him gain world domination