Reload bug & SRA oddness

[Alexandre Oliva]

On May  6, 2007, Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1@t-online.de> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> It might make sense to test whether, instead of a DImode variable, a
>> pair of SImode variables would do (i.e., no bit-fields crossing the
>> SImode boundary), as long as registers are known to hold SImode but
>> not DImode.  But is there a generic way to test for such "efficiency
>> boundaries"?

> I'd start with

>   GET_MODE_SIZE (foo) <= UNITS_PER_WORD

> as a first order approximation.

This is sort of equivalent.  Ok to install on top of the other patch?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: gcc-sra-bit-field-ref-word.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 754 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/attachments/20070506/c191e034/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}