[PATCH] PR/17836 (was Re: [RFA/RFT] Tree-level lowering of generic vectors, part 4)

[Paolo Bonzini]

> 	I understand the alignment change.  Sorry for not making that
> clear.  What I do not understand is the need for the alternate way for
> testing how to pass parameters.  It seems most safe, clean, and clear to
> use the existing implementation: explicitly specify modes that correspond
> to Altivec vector registers, as opposed to testing for types that have the
> right size and number of elements.

Is the attached patch ok?  It converts the type to a vector mode 
unconditionally (independent of TARGET_ALTIVEC) and then uses 
ALTIVEC_VECTOR_MODE.

Paolo
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: vec-supported-mode-p.patch
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/attachments/20041029/ecc36a02/attachment.ksh>