[patch i386]: Fix PR/46219 Generate indirect jump instruction
Richard Henderson
rth@redhat.com
Wed Jun 4 19:59:00 GMT 2014
On 06/04/2014 05:37 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> +(define_peephole2
> + [(set (match_operand:DI 0 "register_operand")
> + (match_operand:DI 1 "memory_operand"))
> + (call (mem:QI (match_operand:DI 2 "register_operand"))
> + (match_operand 3))]
> + "TARGET_64BIT && REG_P (operands[0])
> + && REG_P (operands[2])
> + && SIBLING_CALL_P (peep2_next_insn (1))
> + && REGNO (operands[0]) == REGNO (operands[2])"
> + [(call (unspec [(mem:QI (match_dup 1))] UNSPEC_PEEPSIB) (match_dup 3))])
You can use (match_dup 0) instead of that (match_operand 2);
that allows you to remove
+ && REG_P (operands[2])
+ && REGNO (operands[0]) == REGNO (operands[2])"
You don't need the
+ && REG_P (operands[2])
because of the register_operand constraint; all subregs will have been resolved
at this point.
You need a !TARGET_X32 check for your TARGET_64BIT patches, since the jmpq insn
always reads 64-bits.
> +(define_insn "*sibcall_pop_intern"
> + [(call (unspec [(mem:QI (match_operand:SI 0 "memory_operand"))]
> UNSPEC_PEEPSIB)
Watch your line length (and line-wrapping when posting patches).
Align the UNSPEC_PEEPSIB with the [.
This, and the other following sibcall intern patterns, including
> +(define_insn "*sibcall_value_intern"
> +(define_insn "*sibcall_value_pop_intern"
have no matching peephole2 patterns, and so will never be generated.
You'll need more peep2's.
r~
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list