[PATCH][RFC][2/2] Bitfield lowering

Richard Guenther richard.guenther@gmail.com
Thu Jun 23 10:04:00 GMT 2011


On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> This implements lowering a subset of COMPONENT_REFs with DECL_BIT_FIELD
>> FIELD_DECLs and BIT_FIELD_REFs - thus bitfield operations in general.
>> It lowers those to memory loads/stores that the (non-strict-align) target
>> is able to carry out, adjusting for the bit-field-ness by inserting
>> proper shifting and masking operations (just like expand does).
>
>>
>> Comments welcome - I wanted to post this before London to get
>> some input from people that won't attend.
>
> What does it do to code for targets with some kind of bitfield
> access insns?  (insv, extv, various test insns taking a
> zero_extract or sign_extract argument)

Do those usually work on memory operands?  If not, we can
lower to insv/extv like tree codes (BIT_FIELD_COMPOSE_EXPR,
BIT_FIELD_REF) that operate on registers.  One goal of bitfield
lowering was to disallow memory operations in gimple that
are not addressable or are of non-byte-aligned size.

> From the above "just like expand" I guess it's expected to be a
> no change, right?

Well, I suppose the code in expand has to be adjusted to do the
proper things for those targets.  The question is whether that's
going to be easy or not.

So, do you know of a target that can do insv with a memory
target?  I would expect extv on memory to be easily doable.

Richard.

> brgds, H-P
>



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list