Jeffrey A Law
Wed Aug 26 00:29:00 GMT 1998
In message < 9808230341.AA32574@marc.watson.ibm.com >you write:
> We need to change the 'o' constraint to 'm' for the
> movdf_softfloat32 pattern. The only way I see to do that safely is to
> extend GO_IF_LEGITIMATE_ADDRESS so that DFmode indexed addresses are not
> allowed if soft-float and not 64-bit. That should make the proposed
> change safe for the pattern in question. The movdf_hardfloat32 pattern
> also uses 'o' constraint, but 'm' is valid for FPRs so reload has a
> I think that this same failure mode can occur for movdi_32, so we
> probably should not allow indexed addressing for DImode and not 64-bit
> either. Then we can make the same 'o' -> 'm' change there.
Sorry not to respond earlier.
Yes, this seems quite reasonable.
More information about the Gcc-patches